Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
David Kramer wrote: >I was going through my logwatch reports like a good little sysadmin, and I >found something very unusual in there. I saw packets from 192.168.11.85 >coming in on eth0 (my DSL connection to the outside world). I thought that >was a nonroutable address, so I was wondering how that was even possible. >Could it have been source-routed packets? My ipchains firewall has rules for >both nonroutable addresses and source-routed packets, so I don't know. It might have been source routed, but probably not. A 'nonroutable' address doesn't mean that all routers in the world automatically drop packets with that source (or destination) address. All it really means is that there is no designated single owner for that address (no uniqueness). Any organization (or group of organizations) can decide for itself how to divy up those addresses and configure their routers appropriately. ISPs have even been known to configure ports on their internal routers with 'nonroutable' addresses (not generally recommended as it can cause problems with TCP MTU discovery). Even ISPs that don't do this will often not bother to install filters to drop packets with these addresses. Originally this was probably because it would have slowed down the routers. Now it's probably both historical and because they don't want to have people think that 'security' has anything to do with their equipment (that's an enduser problem). Next thing you know people would would ask them to do something about address spoofing in general like configure all of their edge routers to drop inappropriately sourced packets. That requires keeping track of what addresses are where and could be a real headache. It's much more lucrative to charge for network security consulting/monitoring.. Take care, Bill Bogstad
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |