netdev - Re: conntrack, NAT and icmp echo reply

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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1349949430.21172.8435.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date:	Thu, 11 Oct 2012 11:57:10 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys@...p.net.lb>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: conntrack, NAT and icmp echo reply

On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 12:41 +0300, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> I have NAT box, with very simple rule
> iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/8 -j MASQUERADE
> It can be SNAT also, and it works fine, as NAT.
> 
> When i generate icmp _reply_ packet, to some host
> hping -I ppp0 -1 --icmptype 0 8.8.8.8
> 
> It will pass the box, and will exit it without NAT, e.g. with original 
> IP 10.x.x.x
> on outgoing interface, which is not expected behavior IMHO.
> Is it a bug or feature?
> 

It depends, -s 10.0.0.0/8 wont match the rule if the source address
should be 198.23.44.55 I guess ?

I would try the more obvious

iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -o device -j MASQUERADE



--
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