On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 10:41:50AM -0700, Brett Glass wrote: > At 01:35 AM 12/12/2003, Barney Wolff wrote: > > >Oops, sorry for the confusion. How fancy a change is up to you, > >but changing ALIAS_PORT_BASE and ALIAS_PORT_MASK (and _EVEN) > >would let you confine the port range without much work. > > The current algorithm works so long as the blocked ports have > numbers less than 32768. But there are now lots of Trojans and > worms that use higher ports, and admins may want to block them. > So, there ought to be a way to tell libalias "don't assign anything > in this set of ports" -- via a list or a bitmap.
How is this problem confined to NAT? Seems to me that any system connecting to the Internet would have the same issue, if it's actually a problem at all. So if I were going to solve it (which I'm not) I would expose the kernel's "pick a high port" function, add hitlist capability, and have libalias use it. -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
