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

Re: kernel-image-2.6-k7 and Shorewall firewall



On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Steven Jan Springl wrote:

> On Wednesday 30 July 2008 16:41, Account for Debian group mail wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > We just did an upgrade on one of our etch servers. It installed a bunch
> > of new updates including a kernel-image 2.6.18-6-k7. This computer is
> > running the Shorewall Firewall. Everything seemed to be working OK till we
> > tried to ping the server.
> >
> > The firewall is set to let in pings every second:
> > >From "rules" file inside shorewall - this has always worked:
> >
> > ACCEPT         net             $FW             icmp    8       -       -
> >            1/sec
> >
> > What iptables-save shows:
> > -A net2fw -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -m limit --limit 1/sec -j ACCEPT
> > -A net2fw -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 0 -m limit --limit 1/sec -j ACCEPT
> >
> > Should work!
> >
> > What syslog shows:
> > Jul 30 08:12:19 spare kernel: Shorewall:net2fw:DROP:IN=eth0 OUT=
> > MAC=00:14:2a:4a:3c:cf:xx:xx:xx:25:1c:00:08:00 SRC=20x.10x.xxx.11
> > DST=20x.10x.xxx.38 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP
> > TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=32799 SEQ=8
> > (numbers change to protect the innocent)
> >
> > I change the "rules" file to:
> >
> > ACCEPT         net             $FW             icmp    8       -       -
> >
> > so it just accepts pings and it works just fine.
> >
> > Seems like something has changed in this new kernel-image. Is it possible
> > that 1 second in the iptables stuff is no longer 1 second? Do I need to
> > decrease or increase the time limit? Anyone else run into this? I would
> > still like to limit the ping rates.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ken
> Ken
>
> I have just tried this with the updated 2.6.18-6-k7 kernel, but I cannot
> re-create your problem.
>
> Steven.

Steven,

Thanks for the reply. I went and configured Shorewall back the way it was
and now it works fine. I rebooted the server and still it works the way
it should. I know what it was doing and the logs prove me out. So all I
can think now is that it is an intermittent problem - great.

Again thanks for checking it out on your end.

Ken


Reply to: