Linux Netfilter discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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



  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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox