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]
Date:   Mon, 13 May 2019 19:38:37 +0800
From:   Weilong Chen <>
To:     Michal Kubecek <>, <>
CC:     <>, <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv4: Add support to disable icmp timestamp

On 2019/5/13 15:49, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 09:33:13AM +0800, Weilong Chen wrote:
>> The remote host answers to an ICMP timestamp request.
>> This allows an attacker to know the time and date on your host.
> Why is that a problem? If it is, does it also mean that it is a security
> problem to have your time in sync (because then the attacker doesn't
> even need ICMP timestamps to know the time and date on your host)?
It's a low risk vulnerability(CVE-1999-0524). TCP has 
net.ipv4.tcp_timestamps = 0 to disable it.

>> This path is an another way contrast to iptables rules:
>> iptables -A input -p icmp --icmp-type timestamp-request -j DROP
>> iptables -A output -p icmp --icmp-type timestamp-reply -j DROP
>> Default is disabled to improve security.
> If we need a sysctl for this (and I'm not convinced we do), I would
> prefer preserving current behaviour by default.
Firewall is not applied to all scenarios.

> Michal Kubecek
> .


Powered by blists - more mailing lists