State what the default blocklist covers (closes #244)
check / check (push) Successful in 5m21s
check / check (push) Successful in 5m21s
The default blocklist covers the IPv4 private and reserved ranges, IPv6 loopback, unique local and link-local addresses, and public addresses that serve cloud credentials. A provider's other services on public addresses, such as 161.26.0.0/16 and 166.8.0.0/14, are deliberately not on it: they serve no credentials, reaching them can be legitimate, and every cloud has some, so a partial list would promise coverage it does not give. The README's egress section and the comment above blockedNetworks now state this rule, so nobody infers wider coverage and a future candidate can be accepted or refused against it. No list change. Model: opus-5-5
This commit is contained in:
@@ -162,6 +162,17 @@ public cloud metadata addresses: currently only `168.63.129.16`, Azure's
|
||||
WireServer, which serves an Azure VM its credentials. Because it is a
|
||||
public address, listing it in `ALLOWED_EGRESS_CIDRS` reopens it.
|
||||
|
||||
That is all the default blocklist covers: the IPv4 private and reserved
|
||||
ranges; of IPv6, only loopback (`::1`), unique local addresses
|
||||
(`fc00::/7`) and link-local addresses (`fe80::/10`); and public
|
||||
addresses that serve cloud credentials. A cloud provider's other
|
||||
services on public addresses are not refused. IBM Cloud, for example,
|
||||
serves its DNS resolvers, package mirrors, time servers and object
|
||||
storage on `161.26.0.0/16`, and the private endpoints of its own cloud
|
||||
services on `166.8.0.0/14`. They serve no credentials, reaching them
|
||||
can be a legitimate delivery, and every cloud has some, so a partial
|
||||
list would promise coverage it does not give.
|
||||
|
||||
That default is also inconvenient for the thing webhooker is mostly
|
||||
for: taking a public webhook and forwarding it to something on your own
|
||||
network. A container on the same Docker network, a box on `10.x`, a
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user