RE: (no subject)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



HiHo!

If you still want to log, try to change you LD to this:

Stop macro:
$IPT -N LD
$IPT -A LD -m limit --limit 2/minute -j LOG
$IPT -A LD -j DROP

This will drop everything put into LD, but log only a few.
Be aware that quite a lot packets will be dropped silently.
I assume you used the limit to prevent your log from flodding

Actually i would prefer Antony's version. Just drop 'em, without
logging :)

ciao
  markus 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: netfilter-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:netfilter-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Antony Stone
> Sent: Dienstag, 29. Juni 2004 16:09
> To: netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: (no subject)
> 
> 
> On Tuesday 29 June 2004 2:49 pm, Richard Gutery wrote:
> 
> > Stop macro:
> > $IPT -N LD
> > $IPT -A LD -j LOG
> > $IPT -A LD -j DROP
> 
> That has me really confused.   I was expecting you to say that $STOP expanded 
> to the word DROP, or some other valid target for the -j option on the 
> netfilter command line.
> 
> > $STOP=LD (LD = Log and Drop)
> 
> I don;t quite see how you can use this after -j on an iptables rule, 
> however...
> 
> > $IPT = /sbin/iptables
> >
> > I need to totally block all packets to and from this address 64.246.26.185.
> > So BLOCK means BLOCK.
> >
> > We OpenBSD users usually mean blocking as dropping the silly thing on the
> > floor. No ifs, ands or buts. Just gone...
> 
> Oh, I understood what you meant by "block" - I wasn't sure which packets you 
> wanted to block, though, since it wasn't clear whether we were talking about 
> source or destination addresses, and forwarding through the firewall or going 
> to/from it directly.
> 
> > As for the limiting, I simply copied a rule that was already in a
> > firestarter script. So if I need to change the rule, I would be more than
> > willing. Am I to assume that this is a bad rule?
> 
> Well, it certainly won't BLOCK (using your definition above) - it will rate 
> limit - which means that some packets will still come through.
> 
> I suggest the following:
> 
> iptables -I INPUT -s 64.246.26.185 -j DROP
> iptables -I OUTPUT -d 64.246.26.185 -j DROP
> iptables -I FORWARD -s 64.246.26.185 -j DROP
> iptables -I FORWARD -d 64.246.26.185 -j DROP
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Antony.
> 
> -- 
> In Heaven, the police are British, the chefs are Italian, the beer is Belgian, 
> the mechanics are German, the lovers are French, the entertainment is 
> American, and everything is organised by the Swiss.
> 
> In Hell, the police are German, the chefs are British, the beer is American, 
> the mechanics are French, the lovers are Swiss, the entertainment is Belgian, 
> and everything is organised by the Italians.
> 
>                                                      Please reply to the list;
>                                                            please don't CC me.
> 
> 
> 


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Netfilter Development]     [Linux Kernel Networking Development]     [Netem]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Advanced Routing & Traffice Control]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux