See upstream bug https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1758

nftables is broken in the way, that they do not have a clear "first
match" or "last match" strategy, but do intermix them: accept follows
"last match", while drop/reject follow "first match". This is broken by
design. You cannot mix both strategies within the same rules. That's why
you can't stack rulesets cleanly.


Although they admit, that they just didn't know how to solve the problem and 
deal with it (there is a common and well known solution, i.e. having a 
"proceed"-action, meaning to make no decision at all and proceed with the next 
ruleset), they still have implemented it this way. 

And: They neither tell how this should work, nor are they willing to
change it. Broken by final decision.

They don't see it as a matter of technical functioning. They do see it
as a matter of accepting and respecting their discussions.

As a result, I would have to repeat LXD's rules in my own firewall
rules. And a filter system, where rules have to be repeated in order for
them to have effect, where LXD's own rules do not have any effect at all
and just work as if they didn't exist, is terribly broken.


The sad reality is that nftables is broken because it was built by people just 
not compeHowtent for this task. 

How should ubuntu users deal with this problem?



** Bug watch added: bugzilla.netfilter.org/ #1758
   http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1758

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2072406

Title:
  subtile flaw in kernel packet filter nftables

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2072406/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to