From: Ted Kaczmarek <tedkaz@optonline.net>
To: Antony Stone <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk>
Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: Best Practices for iptables
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 14:29:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1070652599.18670.152.camel@tarkus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200312051809.15662.Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk>
On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 13:09, Antony Stone wrote:
> On Friday 05 December 2003 5:40 pm, Daniel Chemko wrote:
>
> > Best practices:
> >
> > WE ARE ALL HUMAN (I hope)
> >
> > If you are looking for the best case, you'd want to cover your own
> > incompetence. Honestly, I work from this rule.
> > I policy block everything that I haven't allowed explicitly, simply
> > becausd if you try to build it in reverse, you're almost guaranteed to
> > miss a lot of important blocks / etc..
>
> I agree.
>
> Think of it like this:
>
> If you block everything, allow what you want, and forget something, then
> either you or someone you're providing services for will say "this isn't
> working - can you fix it please?" and you can correct the ruleset to allow
> the missing service.
>
> On the other hand, if you allow everything, and block the things you don't
> want, then anything you forget about is more likely to be discovered by
> somebody else on the Internet scanning and probing their way round your IP
> address/es, and if they find something you forgot to block, chances are they
> won't tell you :)
>
> Therefore correcting mistakes is a whole lot easier if you start from the
> "deny everything except these..." approach.
>
> Antony.
Any good firewall implementation should implicitly deny everything on
the INPUT and FORWARD chains. If anyone tells you different they must
work for Microsoft.
Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-05 19:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-05 17:40 Best Practices for iptables Daniel Chemko
2003-12-05 18:09 ` Antony Stone
2003-12-05 19:29 ` Ted Kaczmarek [this message]
2003-12-05 19:43 ` Michael Gale
2003-12-05 21:16 ` Ramin Dousti
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-05 20:54 Daniel Chemko
2003-12-05 21:33 ` Antony Stone
2003-12-05 20:52 Gabby James
2003-12-05 14:28 Gabby James
2003-12-05 14:01 Gabby James
2003-12-05 14:11 ` Ray Leach
2003-12-05 15:40 ` Michael H. Warfield
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1070652599.18670.152.camel@tarkus \
--to=tedkaz@optonline.net \
--cc=Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk \
--cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.