Hy Frank, thank you for this suggestion. Can you explain which is the
advantage in reseting the connection instead of simply dropping it?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Huang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Bruno Negr�o'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 11:34 AM
Subject: RE: Help to analyze the pop3 protocol


> Bruno:
>  I have following code in iptables rules, this might be more appropriate.
>
>  # AUTH server
>   # Reject ident probes with a tcp reset
>   # Need to reset instead of drop for smtp, ftp, ssh and etc.
>   #
>
>   $IPTABLES -A INPUT -i $WAN_IFACE -p tcp \
>     --dport $AUTH -j REJECT --reject-with tcp-reset
>
>   My suggestion is do not run any extra service on your firewall, such as
> AUTH, if you do not have to do so.
>
> Frank Huang
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bruno Negr�o
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 8:23 AM
> To: Skough Axel U/IT-S
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Help to analyze the pop3 protocol
>
>
> Thank you Axel and everybody.
>
> I found that my iptables INPUT chain does allow connections to the 113
port
> (i didn't know it untill I check it now).
> But I don't have any identd process running in my firewall to respond to
the
> auth request (this may be the reason of the reset response:
"13:18:20.486787
> 15bis.etcetera.com.br.auth > falcon.etcetera.com.br.4475: R 0:0(0) ack
> 3342539286 win 0 (DF)")
> Do I need to install identd in my firewall in order to answer these
> requests?
> Does maintain a port opened without a process binded to it is a risk to
the
> firewall?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Skough Axel U/IT-S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Bruno Negr�o'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 10:51 AM
> Subject: RE: Help to analyze the pop3 protocol
>
>
> Hello,
>
> The AUTH protocol is used by some servers on the Internet to verify the
> connecting client. Your firewall should in general allow for incoming AUTH
> requests as the server called may deny access when the client doesn't
> confirm properly via the AUTH check.
> In this case, when your POP3 client is masked behind the firwall using for
> example NAT, the AUTH would be directed to the firewall rather than the
POP3
> client. The firewall is then expected to respond. There is no need to
> forward the AUTH call, but your firewall should be AUTH enabled. (TCP port
> 113).
>
> Most commonly is to use the AUTH protocol for mail servers, not only POP3
> but also SMTP servers. The intention is that the sender should be possible
> to check and thus that illegal or suspicious mail should be trackable even
> when anonymous. Indeed, the purpose is to make it more difficult to send
> truly anonymous mail.
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> Regards / Axel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruno Negr�o [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: den 14 januari 2002 13:31
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Help to analyze the pop3 protocol
>
>
>
> Hy, i'm using a redhat linux with 2 ethernet interfaces and iptables +
> ipmasquerading.
> I made a tcpdump of a connection between a masqueraded client machine
> (192.168.13.10) and my external pop3 server (falcon.etcetera). The
> firewall's name is 15bis.etcetera.com.br
>
> What I found interesting was a connection originated from the pop3 server
> to  my client "auth" port. Does someone can explain what is this
connection
> made for and how it traverses my firewall? (does this new connection
(auth)
> have the state "RELATED"?)
>
>
> 13:18:20.484479 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
S
> 10873842:10873842(0) win 8192 <mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK> (DF)
> 13:18:20.484745 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: S
> 3336463748:3336463748(0) ack 10873843 win 32120 <mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK>
> (DF)
> 13:18:20.485471 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
.
> ack 3336463749 win 8760 (DF)
> 13:18:20.486676 falcon.etcetera.com.br.4475 > 15bis.etcetera.com.br.auth:
S
> 3342539285:3342539285(0) win 32120 <mss 1460,sackOK,timestamp 697211801
> 0,nop,wscale 0> (DF)
> 13:18:20.486787 15bis.etcetera.com.br.auth > falcon.etcetera.com.br.4475:
R
> 0:0(0) ack 3342539286 win 0 (DF)
> 13:18:20.488595 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: P
> 1:40(39) ack 1 win 32120 (DF)
> 13:18:20.491085 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
P
> 0:29(29) ack 40 win 8721 (DF)
> 13:18:20.491337 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: . ack 30
> win 32120 (DF)
> 13:18:20.491405 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: P
> 40:46(6) ack 30 win 32120 (DF)
> 13:18:20.494094 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
P
> 29:42(13) ack 46 win 8715 (DF)
> 13:18:20.502936 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: P
> 46:52(6) ack 43 win 32120 (DF)
> 13:18:20.505369 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
P
> 42:48(6) ack 52 win 8709 (DF)
> 13:18:20.505645 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: P
> 52:61(9) ack 49 win 32120 (DF)
> 13:18:20.510062 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
P
> 48:54(6) ack 61 win 8700 (DF)
> 13:18:20.510286 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: P
> 61:67(6) ack 55 win 32120 (DF)
> 13:18:20.510478 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: F
> 67:67(0) ack 55 win 32120 (DF)
> 13:18:20.511021 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
.
> ack 68 win 8694 (DF)
> 13:18:20.512395 15bis.etcetera.com.br.1257 > falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3:
F
> 54:54(0) ack 68 win 8694 (DF)
> 13:18:20.512600 falcon.etcetera.com.br.pop3 > 192.168.13.10.1257: . ack 56
> win 32120 (DF)
> _______________________________________________
> Firewalls mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Firewalls mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
>
>

_______________________________________________
Firewalls mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls

Reply via email to