From: Vlad Adomnicai <vlada@xana.ro>
To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Two computers with same MAC
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 06:21:36 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40B2BBC0.1080709@xana.ro> (raw)
Hi,
I have a problem on a local LAN.
I have tested and seen that two computers with the same IP and MAC
can use the network at the same time with no problems. I'm interested in
a way to allow only the right owner of the ip and mac to pass through a
linux router and on to the internet.
ROUTER ---> SW ----> Client1
|
--------->Client2.
If client2 changes first it's MAC to the one of the Client1, then
changes the IP to the one of the Client1's computer, none of the
computers will get an IP Conflict and both computers will pass through
the router insetead of a iptables rule set on forward.
itpables -A FORWARD -o eth1 -s IP1 -m mac --mac-source MAC1 -j ACCEPT
iptables -A FORWARD -o eth1 -j REJECT
Any one knows a way to stop Client2 from passsing the router? (both
Client1 and Client2 are running windows).
I have thought to serveral solutions but each one of them has drawbacks.
1. VPN access for clients: allowing only 1 connection form an IP the
problem is solved. The trouble is that the network is big (400-800
users) and for local traffic the routers CPU's will be greatly overcome
(about 100 clients / router).
2. Somehow tinkering with the IP options from clients and marking
them in a certain way then from iptables detecting the special marking (
like using unused fields from the ethernet packet or something like
this). I don't know if it is possible from linux, and if it is possible
from windows for all the packets it sends. If it is possible, then even
if Client2 will try to replicate the change, if I change the value each
5 minutes let's say and change also the rules each 5 minutes on the
router, I can make it impossible for him to pass the router for more
than 5 minutes before having to look again for the value.
3. Managed Switches with MAC set on their ports. This ideea is very
expensive.
4. Something done to the switch or a certain brand of switches that
doesn't allow this to happen.
I welcome gladly and advice possible. ( I would prefere a solution
based on iptables and IP options (maybe TTL changes if it can be done
for the entire windows system).
Vlad Adomnicai
reply other threads:[~2004-05-25 3:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=40B2BBC0.1080709@xana.ro \
--to=vlada@xana.ro \
--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