http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2482
--- Comment #2 from Priscilla Oppenheimer <po@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-04-21 10:08:29 GMT ---
Cisco IOS Extended ACLs are also off-the-mark (squirrelly as I lazily said
before. :-)
For comparison sake, consider, as I mentioned before, that iptables is good for
the situation where we want to block the scanner from sending to ports 0 and
443. These rules are right:
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --destination-port 0 -j DROP
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --destination-port 443 -j DROP
The Cisco IOS Extended ACLs, on the other hand, don't match the iptables logic
and are off-the-mark (at least for my needs). Wireshark chooses the wrong
source address (the target rather than the scanner):
access-list NUMBER deny tcp host 192.168.1.123 any eq 0
access-list NUMBER deny tcp host 192.168.1.123 any eq 443
Thanks for looking into this.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
