Search Results

Search found 3844 results on 154 pages for 'firewall bypass'.

Page 12/154 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • VPN is working, except for DNS lookups. Firewall (Cisco ASA 5505) issue?

    - by macke
    I've got the following set up: LAN -> DHCP / DNS / VPN server (OSX 10.6) -> Cisco ASA 5505 -> WAN Connecting to the LAN via VPN works fine. I get all the details properly and I can ping any host on the internal network using their IP. However, I can't do any host lookups whatsoever. I've looked through the logs on and found this nugget in the firewall log: 3 Sep 08 2010 10:46:40 305006 10.0.0.197 65371 portmap translation creation failed for udp src inside:myhostname.local/53 dst inside:10.0.0.197/65371 Port 53 is dns services, no? Because of that log entry, I'm thinking that the issue is with the firewall, not the server. Any ideas? Please keep in mind that I have very little knowledge and experience with this kind of firewall and the little experience I do have is with the ASDM GUI console, not the CLI console.

    Read the article

  • How do I examine my Windows firewall outbound rules?

    - by David
    I need a program to listen to port 9000 on localhost with my Windows firewall. I've created an outgoing and an incoming rule for my program but I can only see my incomming rule in the Windows firewall general menu? I've also noticed that I've many more outgoing rules in my outgoing rule menu but I can only see 4 outgoing rules in my general firewall menu but I see many many more incomming rules? The program doesn't listen to port 9000 or it doesn't working. I've also tried netstat -a -p to no avail. I didn't see 0.0.0.0:9000 in the output? How can I check if my program listen to port 9000 or connect to port 9000 when it's open?

    Read the article

  • Running a webserver behind a firewall, is it secure?

    - by i.am.intern
    Currently we have a Linux-based firewall which NAT-ing our public IP address to give internet access to our staff's PCs and a Windows Server 2003 for internal filesharing. I want to host Redmine/SVN (a bugtracker) internally behind this firewall using a Linux server. This webserver will be accessed by our clients externally so they can post bug reports. This means that I have to open port 80 & 22 at the firewall to give access to the webserver and me to SSH it from home. However, let's say I'm using password-based SSH for the webserver and somebody cracked it. Does that mean the cracker could ping and access other servers and PCs in the network?

    Read the article

  • What firewall ports do I need to open when using FTPS?

    - by anoopm
    I need to access an ftps server (vsftpd) on a vendor's site. The vendor has a firewall in front of the ftps server and I have a firewall in front of my ftps client. I understand that ports 990, 991 and maybe 989 need to be opened up for control traffic. When looking at it from the vendor's firewall perspective, should these ports be opened up for both inbound and outbound traffic? What about ports for the DATA channel? Do I have to open all ports above 1000? And should I do it for both inbound and outbound traffic? TIA for your help.

    Read the article

  • How can I measure TCP timeout limit on NAT firewall for setting keepalive interval?

    - by jmanning2k
    A new (NAT) firewall appliance was recently installed at $WORK. Since then, I'm getting many network timeouts and interruptions, especially for operations which would require the server to think for a bit without a response (svn update, rsync, etc.). Inbound SSH sessions over VPN also timeout frequently. That clearly suggests I need to adjust the TCP (and ssh) keepalive time on the servers in question in order to reduce these errors. But what is the appropriate value I should use? Assuming I have machines on both sides of the firewall between which I can make a connection, is there a way to measure what the time limit on TCP connections might be for this firewall? In theory, I would send a packet with gradually increasing intervals until the connection is lost. Any tools that might help (free or open source would be best, but I'm open to other suggestions)? The appliance is not under my control, so I can't just get the value, though I am attempting to ask what it currently is and if I can get it increased.

    Read the article

  • How to open a server port outside of an OpenVPN tunnel with a pf firewall on OSX (BSD)

    - by Timbo
    I have a Mac mini that I use as a media server running XBMC and serves media from my NAS to my stereo and TV (which has been color calibrated with a Spyder3Express, happy). The Mac runs OSX 10.8.2 and the internet connection is tunneled for general privacy over OpenVPN through Tunnelblick. I believe my anonymous VPN provider pushes "redirect_gateway" to OpenVPN/Tunnelblick because when on it effectively tunnels all non-LAN traffic in- and outbound. As an unwanted side effect that also opens the boxes server ports unprotected to the outside world and bypasses my firewall-router (Netgear SRX5308). I have run nmap from outside the LAN on the VPN IP and the server ports on the mini are clearly visible and connectable. The mini has the following ports open: ssh/22, ARD/5900 and 8080+9090 for the XBMC iOS client Constellation. I also have Synology NAS which apart from LAN file serving over AFP and WebDAV only serves up an OpenVPN/1194 and a PPTP/1732 server. When outside of the LAN I connect to this from my laptop over OpenVPN and over PPTP from my iPhone. I only want to connect through AFP/548 from the mini to the NAS. The border firewall (SRX5308) just works excellently, stable and with a very high throughput when streaming from various VOD services. My connection is a 100/10 with a close to theoretical max throughput. The ruleset is as follows Inbound: PPTP/1723 Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS/VPN server) from a restricted IP range >corresponding to possible cell provider range OpenVPN/1194 Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS/VPN server) from any Outbound: Default outbound policy: Allow Always OpenVPN/1194 TCP Allow always from 10.0.0.40 (NAS) to a.b.8.1-a.b.8.254 (VPN provider) OpenVPN/1194 UDP Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) to a.b.8.1-a.b.8.254 (VPN provider) Block always from NAS to any On the Mini I have disabled the OSX Application Level Firewall because it throws popups which don't remember my choices from one time to another and that's annoying on a media server. Instead I run Little Snitch which controls outgoing connections nicely on an application level. I have configured the excellent OSX builtin firewall pf (from BSD) as follows pf.conf (Apple App firewall tie-ins removed) (# replaced with % to avoid formatting errors) ### macro name for external interface. eth_if = "en0" vpn_if = "tap0" ### wifi_if = "en1" ### %usb_if = "en3" ext_if = $eth_if LAN="{10.0.0.0/24}" ### General housekeeping rules ### ### Drop all blocked packets silently set block-policy drop ### all incoming traffic on external interface is normalized and fragmented ### packets are reassembled. scrub in on $ext_if all fragment reassemble scrub in on $vpn_if all fragment reassemble scrub out all ### exercise antispoofing on the external interface, but add the local ### loopback interface as an exception, to prevent services utilizing the ### local loop from being blocked accidentally. ### set skip on lo0 antispoof for $ext_if inet antispoof for $vpn_if inet ### spoofing protection for all interfaces block in quick from urpf-failed ############################# block all ### Access to the mini server over ssh/22 and remote desktop/5900 from LAN/en0 only pass in on $eth_if proto tcp from $LAN to any port {22, 5900, 8080, 9090} ### Allow all udp and icmp also, necessary for Constellation. Could be tightened. pass on $eth_if proto {udp, icmp} from $LAN to any ### Allow AFP to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) pass out on $eth_if proto tcp from any to 10.0.0.40 port 548 ### Allow OpenVPN tunnel setup over unprotected link (en0) only to VPN provider IPs ### and port ranges pass on $eth_if proto tcp from any to a.b.8.0/24 port 1194:1201 ### OpenVPN Tunnel rules. All traffic allowed out, only in to ports 4100-4110 ### Outgoing pings ok pass in on $vpn_if proto {tcp, udp} from any to any port 4100:4110 pass out on $vpn_if proto {tcp, udp, icmp} from any to any So what are my goals and what does the above setup achieve? (until you tell me otherwise :) 1) Full LAN access to the above ports on the mini/media server (including through my own VPN server) 2) All internet traffic from the mini/media server is anonymized and tunneled over VPN 3) If OpenVPN/Tunnelblick on the mini drops the connection, nothing is leaked both because of pf and the router outgoing ruleset. It can't even do a DNS lookup through the router. So what do I have to hide with all this? Nothing much really, I just got carried away trying to stop port scans through the VPN tunnel :) In any case this setup works perfectly and it is very stable. The Problem at last! I want to run a minecraft server and I installed that on a separate user account on the mini server (user=mc) to keep things partitioned. I don't want this server accessible through the anonymized VPN tunnel because there are lots more port scans and hacking attempts through that than over my regular IP and I don't trust java in general. So I added the following pf rule on the mini: ### Allow Minecraft public through user mc pass in on $eth_if proto {tcp,udp} from any to any port 24983 user mc pass out on $eth_if proto {tcp, udp} from any to any user mc And these additions on the border firewall: Inbound: Allow always TCP/UDP from any to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) Outbound: Allow always TCP port 80 from 10.0.0.40 to any (needed for online account checkups) This works fine but only when the OpenVPN/Tunnelblick tunnel is down. When up no connection is possbile to the minecraft server from outside of LAN. inside LAN is always OK. Everything else functions as intended. I believe the redirect_gateway push is close to the root of the problem, but I want to keep that specific VPN provider because of the fantastic throughput, price and service. The Solution? How can I open up the minecraft server port outside of the tunnel so it's only available over en0 not the VPN tunnel? Should I a static route? But I don't know which IPs will be connecting...stumbles How secure would to estimate this setup to be and do you have other improvements to share? I've searched extensively in the last few days to no avail...If you've read this far I bet you know the answer :)

    Read the article

  • Why is file sharing over internet still working, despite all firewall exceptions for filesharing being disabled?

    - by Triynko
    Every exception in my windows server firewall that starts with "File and Printer Sharing" is disabled (ordered by name, so that includes domain, public (active), and private profiles). The Network and Sharing Center's options for everything except password protected sharing are off. Why would I still be able to access a network share on that server via an address like "\\my.server.com\" over the internet? The firewall is on for all profiles and blocking incoming connections by default. A "netstat -an" command on the server reveals the share connection is occurring over port 445 (SMB). I restarted the client to ensure it was actually re-establishing a new connection successfully. Is the "Password protected sharing: On" option in Network and Sharing Center bypassing the firewall restrictions, or adding some other exception somewhere that I'm missing? EDIT: "Custom" rules are not the problem. It's the "built-in" rules for Terminal Services that was the problem. Can you believe port 445 (File Sharing Port) has to be wide open to the internet to use Terminal Services Licensing?)

    Read the article

  • If I use a proxy server, can my computer bypass the ISP?

    - by Torpido
    If somebody is using some kind of proxy server to connect to the internet, does their computer connects to the ISP first and then to the proxy server, or does it connect to the proxy server first and then to the ISP? Some of my friends are able to get free internet on their mobile using some Proxy servers. I am not asking you for free internet, I am only asking you how this would be possible. How are they are able to trick the ISP firewall?

    Read the article

  • High frequency, kernel bypass vs tuning kernels?

    - by Keith
    I often hear tales about High Frequency shops using network cards which do kernel bypass. However, I also often hear about them using operating systems where they "tune" the kernel. If they are bypassing the kernel, do they need to tune the kernel? Is it a case of they do both because whilst the network packets will bypass the kernel due to the card, there is still all the other stuff going on which tuning the kernel would help? So in other words, they use both approaches, one is just to speed up network activity and the other makes the OS generally more responsive/faster? I ask because a friend of mine who works within this industry once said they don't really bother with kernel tuning anymore-because they use kernel bypass network cards? This didn't make too much sense as I thought you would always want a faster kernel for all the CPU-offloaded calculations.

    Read the article

  • Is it generally a bad idea to have other types of virtual appliances installed along side a firewall

    - by MGSoto
    I want to run my Firewall/NAT software (pfsense) and an internal NAS (looking at freenas right now) for my SOHO on one machine. Right now I have them separated on two different machines, but I'd like to consolidate them. Is this generally a bad idea? I see the security concern where if the firewall or host OS is compromised, then your data is essentially screwed. But is it really a concern for me?

    Read the article

  • How can I scan from Canon PIXMA MX700 without disabling OS X firewall?

    - by Justin Love
    I have a Canon PIXMA MX700 connected by ethernet. When I first bought it I was using OS X 10.4, and scanner-initiated scanning worked fine. After upgrading to 10.6, neither scanner-initiated or scanning from MP Navigator EX works with the firewall enabled. The firewall lists exceptions for three applications: Canon IJ Network Scan Utility.app Canon IJ Network Scanner Selector.app MP Navigator EX 1.0.app I get no further blocked warnings, and /var/log/appfirewall.log lists nothing for today (my latest attempt to use it).

    Read the article

  • How can I scan from Canon PIXMA MX700 without disabling OS X firewall?

    - by Justin Love
    I have a Canon PIXMA MX700 connected by ethernet. When I first bought it I was using OS X 10.4, and scanner-initiated scanning worked fine. After upgrading to 10.6, neither scanner-initiated or scanning from MP Navigator EX works with the firewall enabled. The firewall lists exceptions for three applications: Canon IJ Network Scan Utility.app Canon IJ Network Scanner Selector.app MP Navigator EX 1.0.app I get no further blocked warnings, and /var/log/appfirewall.log lists nothing for today (my latest attempt to use it).

    Read the article

  • Verizon Fivespot firewall exceptions

    - by Patrick
    I have a Verizon Fivespot Wi-Fi router and am having issues connecting to the computer that uses it to get on the internet. I am able to connect to the Fivespot admin pages remotely and I am able to connect to the internet from the computer behind the Fivespot. I've tried asking this on superuser but have gotten nothing, I figure this is pertinent to programmers working on remote computers as well. There are two sections pertinent to this issue, Port Filtering And, Port Forwarding I've tried each individually and both together but cannot access anything through the router except for the admin page. I am trying to connect through SSH on Port 22 to an Ubuntu 10.04 box over wifi. I have called Verizon Tech Support but they were unhelpful, the person essentially read what it says on each screen without any elaboration. Any help is greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Why does Windows Firewall want to block Google Chrome today?

    - by hippietrail
    I've been using the same public Wi-Fi (staying in a guesthouse) for over a week now. But this morning for the first time I got this puzzling warning from Windows Firewall: Why does Windows Firewall want to block one of the world's most popular web browsers today after being fine with it for years, and being fine with it on this connection for a week? Could it hinge on the words, some features? If so could it be something like a rare or new feature of Chrome that uses a different HTTP port? And if so why doesn't the security alert tell me any more about it? Or could it be a known bug in Windows Firewall? Or perhaps a known virus etc attaching itself to Google Chrome? Or is there a chance it's related to "Other browser makers follow Google's lead, revoke rogue certificates"? I haven't restarted Chrome for days and have downloaded but not installed a Windows update from a few days ago. So I'm not sure what may have managed to change on my machine since yesterday.

    Read the article

  • GPLv2 - Multiple AI chess engines to bypass GPL

    - by Dogbert
    I have gone through a number of GPL-related questions, the most recent being this one: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3248823/legal-question-about-the-gpl-license-net-dlls/3249001#3249001 I'm trying to see how this would work, so bear with me. I have a simple GUI interface for a game of Chess. It essentially can send/receive commands to/from an external chess engine (ie: Tong, Fruit, etc). The application/GUI is similar in nature to XBoard ( http://www.gnu.org/software/xboard/ ), but was independently designed. After going through a number of threads on this topic, it seems that the FSF considers dynamically linking against a GPLv2 library as a derivative work, and that by doing so, the GPLv2 extends to my proprietary code, and I must release the source to my entire project. Other legal precedents indicate the opposite, and that dynamic linking doesn't cause the "viral" effect of the GPL to propagate to my proprietary code. Since there is no official consensus that can give a "hard-and-fast" answer to the dynamic linking question, would this be an acceptable alternative: I build my chess GUI so that it sends/receives the chess engine AI logic as text commands from an external interface library that I write The interface library I wrote itself is then released under the GPL The interface library is only used to communicate via a generic text pipe to external command-line chess engines The chess engine itself would be built as a command-line utility rather than as a library of any sort, and just sends strings in the Universal Chess Interface of Chess Engine Communication Protocol ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_Engine_Communication_Protocol ) format. The one "gotcha" is that the interface library should not be specific to one single GPL'ed chess engine, otherwise the entire GUI would be "entirely dependent" on it. So, I just make my interface library so that it is able to connect to any command-line chess engine that uses a specific format, rather than just one unique engine. I could then include pre-built command-line-app versions of any of the chess engines I'm using. Would that sort of approach allow me to do the following: NOT release the source for my UI Release the source of the interface library I built (if necessary) Use one or more chess engines and bundle them as external command-line utilities that ship with a binary version of my UI Thank you.

    Read the article

  • IPSEC tunnel Fortinet Transparent Mode to inside Fortinet firewall in NAT Mode does not respond to i

    - by TrevJen
    I have 2 fortinet firewalls (fully patched); fw1 is providing an IPSEC tunnel in transparent mode. beneath this firewall is a fw2, a NAT firewall with a VIP address that has been confirmed to work. This configuration is required for my customers who want to connect to a public address space inside of the tunnel, in order to prevent cross over in IP space. This configuration works great for traffic going outbound to the remote side of the tunnel, but not inbound. While sniffing the traffic, I can see the inbound traffic going out of the fw1, but it is never seen at the fw2. Cust Net > 10.1.1.100 | | | FW1 >TRANSPARENT IPSEC | | | FW2 EXT >99.1.1.1.100-VIP | FW2 NAT >192.1.1.100-NAT

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to have an external server with in a companies firewall?

    - by Jonathan
    Hi guys, I am sure this is server admin 101,but I am unsure of the answer and would love some help. I am a software developer I have built an application for a client and am currently hosting it successfully on SliceHost. We are now coming out of Beta and the client wants to have the application within their Firewall, but they do not want to deal with headache of hosting and maintaining the server. Is there a way I can recommend that we put our server at SliceHost within their Firewall? Is that an easy thing to do? If that is not possible, what should I recommend to my client? Thanks! Jonathan

    Read the article

  • iptables: allowing incoming for 192.168.1.0/24 allowed incoming for all?

    - by nortally
    The internal side of my ISP router has three devices: ISP router 128.128.43.1 Firewall router 128.128.43.2 Server 128.128.43.3 Behind the Firewall router is a NAT network using 192.168.100.n/24 This question is regarding iptables running on the Server. I wanted to allow access to port 8080 only from the NAT clients behind the Firewall router, so I used this rule -A Firewall-1-INPUT -s 192.168.100.0/24 -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 8080 -j ACCEPT This worked, but UNEXPECTEDLY ALLOWED GLOBAL ACCESS, which resulted in our JBOSS server getting compromised. I now know that the correct rule is to use the Firewall router's address instead of the internal network, but can anyone explain why the first rule allowed global access? I would have expected it to just fail. Full config, mostly lifted from a RedHat server: *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :Firewall-1-INPUT - [0:0] -A INPUT -j Firewall-1-INPUT -A FORWARD -j Firewall-1-INPUT -A Firewall-1-INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A Firewall-1-INPUT -p icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT -A Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT -A Firewall-1-INPUT -m comment --comment "allow ssh from all" -A Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT -A Firewall-1-INPUT -m comment --comment "allow https from all" -A Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT -A Firewall-1-INPUT -m comment --comment "allow JBOSS from Firewall" ### THIS RESULTED IN GLOBAL ACCESS TO PORT 8080 ### -A Firewall-1-INPUT -s 192.168.100.0/24 -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 8080 -j ACCEPT ### THIS WORKED -A Firewall-1-INPUT -s 128.128.43.2 -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 8080 -j ACCEPt ### -A Firewall-1-INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited COMMIT

    Read the article

  • Why should I use Firewall Zones and not just Address Objects?

    - by SRobertJames
    I appreciate Firewall Address Objects and Address Groups - they simplify management by letting me give a name to a group of addresses. But I don't understand what Firewall Zones (LAN, WAN, DMZ, etc.) do for me over Address Groups. I know all firewalls have them, so there must be a good reason. But what do I gain by stating a rule applies to all traffic from LAN Zone to WAN Zone which comes from LAN Address Group to WAN Address Group? Why not just mention the Address Groups?

    Read the article

  • Windows Firewall: How to allow traffic on port 8080?

    - by Chadworthington
    I am trying to configure team Foundation Server so that 1) it is accessible from within my Home Network 2) and then make the Web site access accessible via the Internet I have a problem with point 1: When I access http://192.168.1.106:8080/tfs/web/ locally from 192.168.1.106, it works. When I access the same web site from another PC in my home network, the abive URL works only if I turn of the Firewall on 192.168.1.106. Can someone please tell me specifically how to allow traffic on port 8080 without turning off Windows Firewall? It seems that the exceptions that I specify are intended for listing programs on the box that need to communicate out. Is IIS the program that I need to make the exception? How do I specify that port 8080 traffic should be allowed for web site traffic on this port? I hope to have success with pt. 2 later but I figure (1) should be done first. I expect issues.

    Read the article

  • How can I debug Cisco Firewall ASA "Dispatch Unit" very high CPU utilisation from ASDM?

    - by Andy
    I have recently had my first firewall installed so I am very new to this whole situation. I am finding that Dispatch unit is becoming overloaded and it would appear to be the reason I get serious bouts of lag on my server. The firewall has had little configuration apart from me blocking all the ports in "Access Rules" and allowing only the ones the server needs and from where it needs them. I guess what I am after is assistance with locating the issues causing "Dispatch Unit" to take up all the CPU Regards --Edit-- With ASDM statistics I found that packets inbound (peak of 70-100k/sec from <1k/sec normal), traffic inbound (peak of 40-50kbits/sec from <1kbits/sec normal) and CPU all peak at the same time so I am pretty sure it is an attack of some sort but as a beginner with ASA I am not sure how to resolve

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to have an external server within a company's firewall?

    - by Jonathan
    Hi guys, I am sure this is server admin 101, but I am unsure of the answer and would love some help. I am a software developer I have built an application for a client and am currently hosting it successfully on SliceHost. We are now coming out of Beta and the client wants to have the application within their firewall, but they do not want to deal with headache of hosting and maintaining the server. Is there a way I can recommend that we put our server at SliceHost within their Firewall? Is that an easy thing to do? Their specific requirements are: For my application to authenticate against their Active Directory, and Only allow access to the application from within their network If that is not possible, what should I recommend to my client?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >