Re: Reject non-ipsec traffic

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

 



On 2011-07-21, Ryan Whelan <rcwhelan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The policy is setup (openswan configures it)
>
> # ip xfrm poli
> src 111.222.333.444/32 dst 444.333.222.111/32 proto gre
> 	dir out priority 2080
> 	tmpl src 111.222.333.444 dst 444.333.222.111
> 		proto esp reqid 16385 mode tunnel
> src 444.333.222.111/32 dst 111.222.333.444/32 proto gre
> 	dir fwd priority 2080
> 	tmpl src 444.333.222.111 dst 111.222.333.444
> 		proto esp reqid 16385 mode tunnel
>
I don't know openswan syntax. setkey syntax provides level `require'
which means if security association is missing, the packet will not be
sent. I guess the openswan `reqid' is the same as setkey `unique' which
is the same as `require' bound to specific security association.

Please note the security policies can be loaded into kernel independently
on IKE daemon, so you are guarded even if daemon does not start.

> The issue is that IPSec is protecting a GRE tunnel and if IPSec fails
> for some reason, GRE will be happy to work without it; tunnelling
> everything in the clear.  I was just hoping to put some kind of fail
> safe in place so if IPSec stopped working or failed to start,
> unencrypted traffic wouldn't be transmitted.
>
I see, another independent meassure. Unfortunatelly you are out of luck
in case of netfilter on egress traffic.

-- Petr

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[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