lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:04:04 +0800
From:	Ming-Ching Tiew <mingching.tiew@...tone.com>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new]  [Bug 9719] New: when a system is configured as a
 bridge, and at the same time configured to have multipath weighted route,
 with one leg goes thru NAT and another without NAT, the nat path will intermittently
 get packets leaking out using internal IP without being SNAT-ted

Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> Distribution: iptables 1.4.0 was used with kernel 2.6.23 and 
>>> iptables 1.3.8
>>> with 2.6.22.15
>>> Hardware Environment: 3 interfaces, 2 interfaces bridged to form 
>>> br0, and
>>> another connects to internet using pppoe.
>>> Software Environment: bridge, multipath routing
>>> Problem Description: when a system is configured as a bridge with IP 
>>> assigned
>>> to br0 interface, and at the same time it is configured to have 
>>> multipath
>>> weighted default route, and one of the default route is NAT-ed and 
>>> another of
>>> the default route is not NAT-ed, then it is NAT-ed interface will 
>>> occasionally
>>> get packets leaking out to it with packets with private IPs.
>
>
> That is most likely because the route changes over time (when the cache
> is flushed) and the NAT mappings for the connection have been set up on
> a different interface. The way to properly do this is to add routing
> rules based on fwmark and use CONNMARK to bind a connection to one of
> the interfaces after the initial multipath routing decision.
>

First of all, I would like to say a big thank you to all of you takes 
interest in replying my post/email. I have altered the distribution 
slightly and the kernel bug list is removed.

It seems from your reply, what is implied is that I cannot change route 
within a connection, and whatever things I do, I must make sure that the 
route remains the same for a particular netfilter connection ?

Regards.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists