Unix Technical Forum

Re: strange results with pf

This is a discussion on Re: strange results with pf within the mailing.openbsd.tech forums, part of the OpenBSD category; --> Um, maybe I'm missing something that has already been clarified, but: from nmap's man: <snip> -s0 IP protocol scans: ...


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Unix Operating Systems > OpenBSD > mailing.openbsd.tech

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-18-2008, 06:33 AM
Oliver Neubauer
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: strange results with pf

Um, maybe I'm missing something that has already been clarified, but:

from nmap's man:

<snip>
-s0 IP protocol scans: This method is used to determine
which IP protocols are supported on a host. The
technique is to send raw IP packets without any
further protocol header to each specified protocol
on the target machine. *If we receive an ICMP pro-
tocol unreachable message, then the protocol is not
in use. Otherwise we assume it is open*. Note that
some hosts (AIX, HP-UX, Digital UNIX) and firewalls
may not send protocol unreachable messages.* This
causes all of the protocols to appear "open".*
<snip>


You are blocking the unr replys with

block return-icmp(proto-unr) in inet all
block return-icmp(port-unr) in inet proto udp all
block return-rst in inet proto tcp all

Thus everything appears open to nmap.
This is not a problem with the behavior of pf. It is an artefact of nmap.

Hope this helps.



Alexei G. Malinin wrote:

>Hello!
>
>
>Recently I configured pf on my mail gateway (patched OpenBSD-3.3
>RELEASE) as follows:
>--------------
># pfctl -s all
>scrub in all fragment reassemble
>block drop all
>block return-icmp(proto-unr) in inet all
>block return-icmp(port-unr) in inet proto udp all
>block return-rst in inet proto tcp all
>pass in quick on lo0 inet all
>pass out quick on lo0 inet all
>block drop in quick inet from 224.0.0.0/4 to any
>block drop in quick inet from 240.0.0.0/4 to any
>block drop in quick inet from 0.0.0.0/8 to any
>block drop in quick inet from 192.0.2.0/24 to any
>block drop in quick inet from 169.254.0.0/16 to any
>block drop in quick inet from 198.18.0.0/15 to any
>block drop in quick inet from 127.0.0.0/8 to any
>block drop in quick inet from any to 224.0.0.0/4
>block drop in quick inet from any to 240.0.0.0/4
>block drop in quick inet from any to 0.0.0.0/8
>pass in quick on fxp0 inet proto tcp from any to 192.168.150.13 port =
>smtp flags S/SA keep state (max 4096)
>pass in quick on fxp0 inet proto tcp from any to 192.168.150.13 port =
>ssh flags S/SA keep state (max 17)
>pass in quick on fxp0 inet proto udp from any to 192.168.150.13 port
>33433 >< 33690 keep state (max 127)
>pass in quick on fxp0 inet proto icmp from any to 192.168.150.13
>icmp-type echoreq code 0 keep state (max 127)
>pass out quick on fxp0 inet proto tcp from 192.168.150.13 to any flags
>S/SA keep state
>pass out quick on fxp0 inet proto udp from 192.168.150.13 to any keep state
>pass out quick on fxp0 inet proto icmp from 192.168.150.13 to any
>icmp-type echoreq code 0 keep state
>icmp 192.168.150.13:63312 <- 192.168.150.254:63312 0:0
>[cut]
>Status: Enabled for 0 days 18:42:44 Debug: None
>
>State Table Total Rate
>current entries 197
>searches 9738453 144.6/s
>inserts 665295 9.9/s
>removals 665098 9.9/s
>Counters
>match 4421401 65.6/s
>bad-offset 0 0.0/s
>fragment 0 0.0/s
>short 426 0.0/s
>normalize 36 0.0/s
>memory 0 0.0/s
>tcp.first 3600s
>tcp.opening 900s
>tcp.established 432000s
>tcp.closing 3600s
>tcp.finwait 600s
>tcp.closed 180s
>udp.first 60s
>udp.single 30s
>udp.multiple 60s
>icmp.first 20s
>icmp.error 10s
>other.first 60s
>other.single 30s
>other.multiple 60s
>frag 30s
>interval 10s
>states hard limit 10000
>frags hard limit 5000
>---------------------
>
>After that I checked that smtp, ssh, ping, traceroute worked and
>scanned this host with nmap:
>-------------------------------
># nmap -sO -v -r 192.168.150.13
>-------------------------------
>
>nmap said that all protocols are open (??).
>I looked at tcpdump output made during the scan -
>there were no icmp "proto-unr" packets (??!).
>
>Can anybody explain me such behaviour of pf?
>I expected to find icmp "proto-unr" in the tcpdump output.


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
www.UnixAdminTalk.com