This is a discussion on My Inheritance: Solaris 9, ipfilter 3.4.29 x 3 systems, crashes within the IPFilter forums, part of the System Security and Security Related category; On Mon, 31 Mar 2008, Rugen, Len wrote: > I inherited a group of Solaris systems. They have been having ...
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008, Rugen, Len wrote:
> I inherited a group of Solaris systems. They have been having some > problems since before I was assimilated that I think I've tracked down > to ipfilter. I'm new to this list, and this is like the second submission I got in like several weeks. Is the volume of this list is really that low or are responses encouraged to reply straight to the original poster? > The problem first described was the Veritas Vxsvc process would become > unresponsive and unkillable until reboot. I finally discovered that > this didn't happen until ipf rules were changed. The prior technique > was ipfboot stop and ipfboot start. I changed this to ipfboot reload > and it is much better. Before it died every time, if not immediately, > after a few days, now it has just failed once after many changes. This is not surprising as a stop/start will probably dump your state table leaving existing connections orphaned. > It looks like ipf was downloaded and installed as a precompiled package. > Any suggestions / opinions on upgrading ipfilter on these systems? I'm > currently reviewing the rules and to me, they are UGLY. Could cleaner > rules help? They have very few KEEP STATE, maybe 500 entries and no > grouping. From ipfstat, particularly for the pass out rules, few if any > have count other than 0. I would think that no set of rules, no matter how ugly, should ever crash the firewall/kernel and cause what seems to be a data alignment error (i.e. accessing word values on non-word boundaries). This looks like a bug in IPF, and more knowledgable people could probably guess which bug. I would hazard a guess that an upgrade to the latest IPF might be in order. But straightening out your rules is a good thing to do, regardless of whether it fixes your bug. Joseph Tam <tam@math.ubc.ca> |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|