From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bash <0x62ash@gmail.com> Subject: Re: help me (nfcan: addressed to exclusive sender for this address) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:54:58 +0400 Message-ID: <20060329215458.bf063d97.0x62ash@gmail.com> References: <20060329041937.7d7f5bbb.0x62ash@gmail.com> <1143597051.12219.91.camel@localhost> <20060329072933.26ba1e7a.0x62ash@gmail.com> <20060329042226.GK7855@salty> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060329042226.GK7855@salty> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 23:22:26 -0500 Jim Laurino wrote: > I am not an expert on this, > but for what it is worth: > > Perhaps the rules used to detect > and limit brute force ssh attacks > could be adapted to your need. You are talking about "recent" module... I don't know how I can use it in my situation.... > Does NetLook have a predictable pattern? Forget about NetLook... My criteria for blocking is: if rate of SYN packages from ONE source IP is greater then 3packets/sec => then block this IP And i can't add rule "-m limit" per all source IP in my net, because my net is big (~255^3).... > You can find out about the ssh blocking rules > if you search the archives for 'brute force'. > > Hope that helps. -- Biomechanica Artificial Sabotage Humanoid