Design and Performance of the OpenBSD Stateful Packet Filter (pf) Daniel Hartmeier dhartmei@openbsd.org Systor AG Usenix 2002 – p.1/22
Introduction part of a firewall, working on IP packet level (vs. application level proxies or ethernet level bridges) packet filter intercepting each IP packet that passes through the kernel (in and out on each interface), passing or blocking it stateless inspection based on the fields of each packet stateful filtering keeping track of connections, additional information makes filtering more powerful (sequence number checks) and easier (replies, random client ports) Usenix 2002 – p.2/22
Motivation OpenBSD included IPFilter in the default install what appeared to be a BSD license turned out to be non-free unlike other license problems discovered by the ongoing license audit, this case couldn’t be resolved, IPFilter removed from the tree existing alternatives were considered (ipfw), larger code base, kernel dependencies rewrite offers additional options, integrates better with existing kernel features Usenix 2002 – p.3/22
Overview Introduction Motivation Filter rules, skip steps State table, trees, lookups, translations (NAT, redirections) Benchmarks Conclusions Usenix 2002 – p.4/22
Filter rules linear linked list, evaluated top to bottom for each packet (unlike netfilter’s chains tree) rules contain parameters that match/mismatch a packet rules pass or block a packet last matching rule wins (except for ’quick’, which aborts rule evaluation) rules can create state, further state matching packets are passed without rule set evaluation Usenix 2002 – p.5/22
Skip steps transparent optimization of rule set evaluation, improve performance without affecting semantics example: ten consecutive rules apply only to packets from source address X, packet has source address Y, first rule evaluated, next nine skipped skipping is done on most parameters, in pre-defined order parameters like direction (in, out), interface or address family (IPv4/IPv6) partition the rule set a lot, performance increase is significant worst case: consecutive rules have no equal parameters, every rule must be evaluated, no additional cost (linked list traversal) Usenix 2002 – p.6/22
State table TCP (sequence number checks on each packet), ICMP error messages match referred to packet (simplifies rules without breaking PMTU etc.) UDP, ICMP queries/replies, other protocols, pseudo-connections with timeouts adjustable timeouts, pseudo-connections for non-TCP protocols binary search tree (AVL, now Red-Black), O(log n) even in worst-case key is two address/port pairs Usenix 2002 – p.7/22
Translations (NAT, redirections) translating source addresses: NAT/PAT to one address using proxy ports translating destination: redirections (based on addresses/ports) mapping stored in state table application level proxies (ftp) in userland Usenix 2002 – p.8/22
State table keys one state entry per connection, stored in two trees example: 10.1.1.1:20000 -> 62.65.145.30:50001 -> 129.128.5.191:80 outgoing packets: 10.1.1.1:20000 -> 129.128.5.191:80, replace source address/port with gateway incoming packets: 129.128.5.191:80 -> 62.65.145.30:50001, replace destination address/port with local host three address/port pairs of one connection: lan, gwy, ext without translation, two pairs are equal Usenix 2002 – p.9/22
State table keys two trees: tree-lan-ext (outgoing) and tree-ext-gwy (incoming), contain the same state pointers no addition translation map (and lookup) needed Usenix 2002 – p.10/22
Normalization IP normalization (scrubbing) to remove interpretation ambiguities, like overlapping fragments (confusing IDSs) reassembly (caching) of fragments before filtering, only complete packets are filtered sequence number modulation Usenix 2002 – p.11/22
Logging through bpf, virtual network interface pflog0 link layer header used for pf related information (rule, action) binary log files, readable with tcpdump and other tools Usenix 2002 – p.12/22
Benchmarks: Setup two (old) i386 machines with two network interface cards each, connected with two crosswire Cat5 cables, 10 mbit/s unidirectional tester: generate TCP packets on ethernet level through first NIC, capture incoming ethernet frames on second NIC firewall: OpenBSD and GNU/Linux (equal hardware), IP forwarding enabled, packet filter enabled, no other services, no other network traffic (static arp table) Usenix 2002 – p.13/22
Benchmarks: Packet generation TCP packets of variable size, random source/destination addresses and ports embedded timestamp to calculate latency, incremental serial number to detect packet loss send packets of specified size at specified rate for several seconds, print throughput, latency and loss verify that setup can handle maximum link rate correctly Usenix 2002 – p.14/22
Local, reaching link limit 900 1518 bytes/packet 800 700 receiving rate (packets/s) 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.15/22
Local, reaching link limit 900 1518 bytes/packet 812 800 700 receiving rate (packets/s) 600 500 400 300 200 100 812 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.15/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 1518 bytes 1.2e+06 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 812 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 1280 bytes 1.2e+06 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 961 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 1024 bytes 1.2e+06 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 1197 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 768 bytes 1.2e+06 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 1586 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 512 bytes 1.2e+06 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 2349 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 256 bytes 1.2e+06 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 4528 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 1.2e+06 128 bytes 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 8445 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 1.2e+06 1e+06 64 bytes throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 14880 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Local, varying packet sizes 1.4e+06 Local OpenBSD GNU/Linux 1.2e+06 1e+06 throughput (bytes/s) 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.16/22
Stateless, 100 rules, throughput 5000 iptables 4500 4000 throughput (packets/s) 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.17/22
Stateless, 100 rules, throughput 5000 iptables ipf 4500 4000 throughput (packets/s) 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.17/22
Stateless, 100 rules, throughput 5000 iptables ipf 4500 pf 4000 throughput (packets/s) 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 sending rate (packets/s) Usenix 2002 – p.17/22
Maximum throughput vs. rules 5000 iptables ipf 4500 pf maximum throughput (packets/s) 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 200 400 600 800 1000 number of rules Usenix 2002 – p.18/22
Maximum throughput vs. states 7500 ipf pf 7000 maximum throughput (packets/s) 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 number of states Usenix 2002 – p.19/22
Conclusions rule set evaluation is expensive. State lookups are cheap filtering statefully not only improves filter decision quality, it actually increases performance memory cost: 64000 states with 64MB RAM (without tuning), increasing linearly binary search tree for states scales with O(log n) Usenix 2002 – p.20/22
Production results Duron 700MHz, 128MB RAM, 3x DEC 21143 NICs 25000-40000 concurrent states average of 5000 packets/s fully stateful filtering (no stateless passing) CPU load doesn’t exceed 10 percent (same box and filter policy with IPFilter was 90 percent load average) Usenix 2002 – p.21/22
Questions? The OpenBSD Project: http://www.openbsd.org/ Paper and slides: http://www.benzedrine.cx/pf.html dhartmei@openbsd.org Usenix 2002 – p.22/22
Recommend
More recommend
