From: Antony Stone <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk>
To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: Leaking ICMP and UDP packets
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 18:46:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200404201846.38703.Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404191102000.2276-100000@dudester.spoontail.com>
On Tuesday 20 April 2004 6:13 pm, Daniel David Benson wrote:
> > Are you sure they are un-NATted packets "leaking" through netfilter, and
> > not ICMP packets being sent back to some remote system by the firewall
> > itself, saying "host unreachable" etc?
>
> Finally, after 24 hours I got the following packets on my front edge
> (public) interface:
>
> 09:57:48.388232 10.101.10.103 > 169.254.85.249: icmp: time exceeded
> in-transit 09:58:03.386143 10.101.10.103 > 169.254.85.249: icmp: time
> exceeded in-transit 09:58:18.386973 10.101.10.103 > 169.254.85.249: icmp:
> time exceeded in-transit
>
> * This internal IP isn't any of the 1 to 1 NATs listed below and should
> come out as the global NAT IP.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 169.254.85.249 one of those Microsoft
"let's make up a network range if we can't find anyone to talk to" addresses?
In other words, the original packet did not come from the outside world,
therefore did not come through your firewall (it came from a lonely Windows
machine inside your network which has decided to create its own IP address,
and has then decided to send packets to 10.101.10.103, which returned an ICMP
error through your default gateway), and therefore there was no automatic
reverse NAT in place to set the source address to what you would expect?
I bet you can't find the original packet, to which this ICMP TTL exceeded
message corresponds, in your packet sniffer logs, because it never came in
through the firewall in the first place.
Regards,
Antony.
--
This email is intended for the use of the individual addressee(s) named above
and may contain information that is confidential, privileged or unsuitable
for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humour, or
irrational religious beliefs.
If you have received this email in error, you are required to shred it
immediately, add some nutmeg, three egg whites and a dessertspoonful of
caster sugar. Whisk until soft peaks form, then place in a warm oven for 40
minutes. Remove promptly and let stand for 2 hours before adding some
decorative kiwi fruit and cream. Then notify me immediately by return email
and eat the original message.
Please reply to the list;
please don't CC me.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-20 17:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-19 16:17 Leaking ICMP and UDP packets Daniel David Benson
2004-04-19 16:31 ` Frank Gruellich
2004-04-19 16:54 ` Daniel David Benson
2004-04-19 17:08 ` Daniel David Benson
2004-04-19 17:45 ` Antony Stone
2004-04-20 17:13 ` Daniel David Benson
2004-04-20 17:46 ` Antony Stone [this message]
2004-04-20 18:06 ` Daniel David Benson
2004-04-20 18:37 ` Antony Stone
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=200404201846.38703.Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk \
--to=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