Re: iptables 'syn but not new' packets

From: Cedric Blancher (blancher@cartel-info.fr)
Date: Fri Dec 14 2001 - 02:25:52 PST

  • Next message: Burton@SNS: "RE: Win XP IP address hijack?"

    le jeu 13-12-2001 à 15:16, Leonardo Rodrigues a écrit :
    >     I understand 'restart the firewall' as a 'iptables -F; iptables -X;
    > iptables -Z' and not as a really machine reboot. In the case of a
    > machine reboot, it would be very difficult ( if not impossible )
    > guarantee that opened connections would remain opened. Who knows how
    > much time the machine will take to boot ????
    
    Sure. You can imagine you have a spare firewall for failover using VRRP.
    Shut down the master, and slave will be acting, with a kind of reseted
    state.
    
    >     I've not REAL tested this, but with this simple tests, seems that a
    > soft restart of the firewall ( 1-2 seconds ) would NOT lost opened
    > connections, as states are NOT done by directly by ip_tables. 
    >     What do you think on that ??
    
    iptables and Netfilter, although they are closely linked, are two
    seperate things. iptables is a userland tool that aims to configure
    Netfilter ip_table stuff.
    Netfilter also provides ip_conntrack, which acts separatly from
    ip_table. Even if you do not use --match state, having ip_conntrack
    loaded _will_ classify _all_ connections state.
    Doing "iptables -F; iptables -X; iptables -Z" will only act on ip_table,
    but not on ip_conntrack. Nowadays, I am not aware of a tool that can act
    on ip_conntrack tables (we can grab state table, but not yet act on).
    
    The be quick, iptables does not act on ip_conntrack stuff.
    
    -- 
    Cédric Blancher
    Consultant sécurité systèmes et réseaux
    Cartel Informatique - Groupe CGBI - http://www.cartel-info.fr/
    Tél : 01 44 06 97 87 - Fax 01 44 06 97 99
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Dec 14 2001 - 09:15:19 PST