Search Results

Search found 2676 results on 108 pages for 'spam blocking'.

Page 21/108 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

• Has this server been compromised?

  - by Griffo

  A friend is running a VPS (CentOS) His business partner was the sysadmin but has left him high and dry to look after the system. So, I've been asked to help out in fixing an apparent spam problem. His IP address got blacklisted for unsolicited mail. I'm not sure where to look for a problem, but I started with netstat to see what open connections were running. It looks to me like he has remote hosts connected to his SMTP server. Here's the output: Active Internet connections (w/o servers) Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State tcp 0 0 78.153.208.195:imap 86-40-60-183-dynamic.:10029 ESTABLISHED tcp 0 0 78.153.208.195:imap 86-40-60-183-dynamic.:10010 ESTABLISHED tcp 0 1 78.153.208.195:35563 news.avanport.pt:smtp SYN_SENT tcp 0 0 78.153.208.195:35559 vip-us-br-mx.terra.com:smtp TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 78.153.208.195:35560 vip-us-br-mx.terra.com:smtp TIME_WAIT tcp 1 1 78.153.208.195:imaps 86-40-60-183-dynamic.:11647 CLOSING tcp 1 1 78.153.208.195:imaps 86-40-60-183-dynamic.:11645 CLOSING tcp 0 0 78.153.208.195:35562 mx.a.locaweb.com.br:smtp TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 78.153.208.195:35561 mx.a.locaweb.com.br:smtp TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 78.153.208.195:imap 86-41-8-64-dynamic.b-:49446 ESTABLISHED Does this indicate that his server may be acting as an open relay? Mail should only be outgoing from localhost. Apologies for my lack of knowledge but I don't work on linux in my day job. EDIT: Here's some output from /var/log/maillog which looks like it may be the result of spam. If it appears to be the case to others, where should I look next to investigate a root cause? I put the server IP through www.checkor.com and it came back clean. Jun 29 00:02:13 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302133.721674 status: local 0/10 remote 9/20 Jun 29 00:02:13 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302133.886182 delivery 74116: deferral: 200.147.36.15_does_not_like_recipient./Remote_host_said:_450_4.7.1_Client_host_rejected:_cannot_find_your_hostname,_[78.153.208.195]/Giving_up_on_200.147.36.15./ Jun 29 00:02:13 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302133.886255 status: local 0/10 remote 8/20 Jun 29 00:02:13 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302133.898266 delivery 74115: deferral: 187.31.0.11_does_not_like_recipient./Remote_host_said:_450_4.7.1_Client_host_rejected:_cannot_find_your_hostname,_[78.153.208.195]/Giving_up_on_187.31.0.11./ Jun 29 00:02:13 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302133.898327 status: local 0/10 remote 7/20 Jun 29 00:02:14 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302134.137833 delivery 74111: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ Jun 29 00:02:14 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302134.137914 status: local 0/10 remote 6/20 Jun 29 00:02:19 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302139.903536 delivery 74000: failure: 209.85.143.27_failed_after_I_sent_the_message./Remote_host_said:_550-5.7.1_[78.153.208.195_______1]_Our_system_has_detected_an_unusual_rate_of/550-5.7.1_unsolicited_mail_originating_from_your_IP_address._To_protect_our/550-5.7.1_users_from_spam,_mail_sent_from_your_IP_address_has_been_blocked./550-5.7.1_Please_visit_http://www.google.com/mail/help/bulk_mail.html_to_review/550_5.7.1_our_Bulk_Email_Senders_Guidelines._e25si1385223wes.137/ Jun 29 00:02:19 vps-1001108-595 qmail: 1309302139.903606 status: local 0/10 remote 5/20 Jun 29 00:02:19 vps-1001108-595 qmail-queue-handlers[15501]: Handlers Filter before-queue for qmail started ... EDIT #2 Here's the output of netstat -p with the imap and imaps lines removed. I also removed my own ssh session Active Internet connections (w/o servers) Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State PID/Program name tcp 0 1 78.153.208.195:40076 any-in-2015.1e100.net:smtp SYN_SENT 24096/qmail-remote. tcp 0 1 78.153.208.195:40077 any-in-2015.1e100.net:smtp SYN_SENT 24097/qmail-remote. udp 0 0 78.153.208.195:48515 125.64.11.158:4225 ESTABLISHED 20435/httpd

  Read the article

• WatchGuard 'Internal Policy' intermittently blocking outbound web traffic

  - by vfilby

  I have a lot of legitimate outbound traffic intermittently being denied by WatchGuard's "Internal Policy." Today I tried to go to Splunk's homepage and my traffic was denied by my watchguard XTM 22 with Pro upgrade. What is the "Internal Policy" and what can I do to control it? Example of Traffic being blocked Type Date Action Source IP Port Interface Destination IP Port Policy Traffic 2011-09-21T18:24:43 Deny 10.0.0.90 49627 3-Primary LAN 64.127.105.40 80 Firebox Internal Policy http/tcp Top three firewall policies:

  Read the article

• Blocking ports in Airport Express

  - by gok

  I want to block torrent and other file sharing apps from Airport Express. How could I achieve this? I am not asking the port numbers. It's so sad that Airport Express is a very closed system. I miss my old Alcatel router in which every setting was possible.

  Read the article

• DirectAccess Server firewall rules blocking ports

  - by StormPooper

  I have configured DirectAccess on my Server 2012 Essentials box and most of it works great - I can remotely access the server via RDP and the default IIS website on port 80. However, I can't access anything that uses other ports. For this example, the Team Foundation Server website. The only way to access it is by accessing http://localhost:8080/tfs on the server directly - even when using http://servername:8080/tfs or http://192.168.1.100:8080/tfs won't work. I've tried adding the ports to the NAT exceptions using Set-NetNatTransitionConfiguration –IPv4AddressPortPool and while that has allowed some ports used internally (Deluge, for example) it hasn't allowed me access to the URL. I think I've narrowed it down to the "DirectAccess Server Settings" Group Policy that is created when configuring DirectAccess. When I disable the link for this GPO, the TFS site works again, but the default IIS site stops working (but RDP still works). I already have rules in the firewall on the server for TFS and before enabling this Group Policy (so before configuring DirectAccess) I could access both sites. Does anybody have any suggestions for things I can change to allow access to both? I've uploaded the full GPO report and my Remote Access Configuration Summary for more details.

  Read the article

• Blocking nslookup on A record

  - by msher420

  Need to know which port to be blocked in my local machine so that the nslookup on A record doesnot work? To know the above i need to understand how the lookup on A record how does the request go from the local machine (port) to the nameservers/ rootservers? For example: C: nslookup -type=a google.com Server: MyDslModem.local.lan Address: 192.168.1.1 Non-authoritative answer: Name: google.com Address: 209.85.231.104 Here which from which local port from the local machine does the lookup starts from?

  Read the article

• Parallel port blocking

  - by asalamon74

  I have a legacy Java program which handles a special card printer by sending binary data to the LPT1 port (no printer driver is involved, the Java program creates the binary stream). The program was working correctly with the client's old computer. The Java program sent all the bytes to the printer and after sending the last byte the program was not blocked. It took an other minute to finish the card printing, but the user was able to continue the work with the program. After changing the client's computer (but not the printer, or the Java program), the program does not finish the task till the card is ready, it is blocked until the last second. It seems to me that LPT1 has a different behavior now than was before. Is it possible to change this in Windows? I've checked BIOS for parallel port settings: The parallel port is set to EPP+ECP (but also tried the other two options: Bidirectional, Output only). Maybe some kind of parallel port buffer is too small? How can I increase it?

  Read the article

• How to protect my VPS from winlogon RDP spam requests

  - by Valentin Kuzub

  I got some hackers constantly hitting my RDP and generating thousands of audit failures in event log. Password is pretty elaborate so I dont think bruteforcing will get them anywhere. I am using VPS and I am pretty much a noob in Windows Server security (am a programmer myself and its my webserver for my site). Which is a recommended approach to deal with this? I would rather block IPs after some amount of failures for example. Sorry if question is not appropriate.

  Read the article

• Blocking password policy (expiry) for a particular OU in AD

  - by Kip

  Hey SF Folks, Situation is this: I need to have a particular container in my AD environment which blocks password expiry policy, but accepts all other policies. Is this something that would work by simply adding in a GPO at the sub-ou level (the ou in question is a child of ou's where GPO's including password stuff is set). These accounts (and this ou) already exist and will have the default domain policy as well as other policies applied and they should continue to receive policy settings as per those GPO's, with the exception of the Password Expiry. We have tried the password do not expire tickbox and that seems not to have worked. Thanks in advance. Kip

  Read the article

• SeLinux blocking connection to sshd on Ubuntu 9.10

  - by Barton Chittenden

  When I try to log on to my laptop, which runs Ubuntu 9.10, the server rejects my login attempts. Checking /var/log/auth.log, I see the following: Feb 14 12:41:16 tiger-laptop sshd[6798]: error: ssh_selinux_getctxbyname: Failed to get default SELinux security context for tiger I googled for this, and ran across the following: http://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-.../msg13049.html Here's the part that I think relates to the problem that I'm having: Quote: What's wrong on my system? Why it's not possible to login even if selinux is in permissive mode? Any suggestions? I'd start by trying to figure out why sshd isn't running in sshd_t (it seems to be running in sysadm_t). Paul. selinux mailing list selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mail...stinfo/selinux Yes, sshd is running in sysadm_t: ps axZ | grep sshd system_u:system_r:sysadm_t 3632 ? Ss 0:00 /usr/sbin/sshd -o PidFile=/var/run/sshd.init.pi ls -Z /usr/sbin/sshd system_ubject_r:sshd_exec_t /usr/sbin/sshd Don't know why it's not sshd_t. I didn't modified something. It's a standard installation of sles11 with the default reference policy from tresys. Maybe this code snippet from policy/modules/services/ssh.te is responsible for that: Allow ssh logins as sysadm_r:sysadm_t gen_tunable(ssh_sysadm_login, true) Any ideas? Do you have boolean init_upstart set to on? if not try setting it to on. I do not believe ssh_sysadm_login boolean works currently but i may be mistaken. -- Yeah, setting init_upstart to on did the trick! THANK A LOT! Do you know why this prevents the user from logging in through ssh even if selinux is set to permissive?? Ok, so the million dollar question is "where do I set 'init_upstart=1'"? It's not clear from context which configuration file needs to be edited, and I'm not at all familiar with SELinux configuration.

  Read the article

• Blocking internet poker applications

  - by Matthew Savage

  I 'look after' the wireless internet for a cafe where I live, and we've noticed that there's quite a substantial slow down of internet speeds when certain users are playing internet poker. I've put in filters to block any HTTP traffic referencing gambling and poker etc, however I want to be able to block any applications (i.e. poker clients) which don't use HTTP. I've tried searching around for a list of poker clients and perhaps their ports, but have had no real luck. Does anyone know what these might be?

  Read the article

• How to prevent blocking http auth popups on firefox restart with many tabs open

  - by Glen S. Dalton

  I am using the latest firefox with tab mix plus and tabgoups manager. I have maybe 50 or 100 tabs oben in different tab groups. When I shutdown firefox and start it again all tabs and tab groups are perfectly rebuilt. But I have also many pages open that are behind a standard http auth, and these pages all request their usernames and passwords. So during startup firefox pops up all these pages' http auth windows. And they block everything else in firefox, they are like modal windows. (I am involved in website development and the beta versions are behind apache http auth.) I have to click many times the OK button in the popups, before I can do anything. All the usernames and passwords are already filled in. (And the firefox taskbar entry blinks and the firefox window heading also blinks, and focus switches back and foth, which also annoys me. And sometimes the popups do not react to my clicks, because firefox is maybe just switching focus somewhere else. This is the worst.) I want a plugin or some way to skip those popups. There are some plugins I tried some time ago, but they did not do what I need, because they require a mouse click for each login, which is no improvement over the situation like it already is. This is not about password storage (because firefox already stores them). But of course, if some password storing plugin could heal this it would be great.

  Read the article

• Change the number of consecutive frequent ssh login before temporary blocking the user login

  - by Kenneth

  my server currently would temporarily refuse a user to login for certain amount of time (maybe ~20min) if the user consecutively frequent ssh login for 3 times. Can I change this behaviour (say relaxed the definition of frequent maybe from 'within 5 sec' to 'within 10 sec'; or increase the # of consecutive login from 3 to 5)? Thanks. Added: Ah.. now I think the problem was not with the ssh. I just tried on another newly installed server. consecutive successful login won't block the user. I have no sudo permission on the server I mentioned above. Now I suspect this behaviour may cause by the firewall in the system. Thanks everyone's comments. ADDED 2: Ah... after some searches. I think the server is using /sbin/iptables to do it as I can see the iptables program is there even though I don't have permission to list the rules. Thanks everyone, special thank to jaume and Mark!

  Read the article

• browser blocking image download when nginx was placed infront of apache to serve static content

  - by railscoder

  I was tying to place nginx infront of apache to server static content. This set up was performing better than just having apache. but suddenly some change caused images getting blocked for like 2-3sec before actually downloading with apache+nginx setup. It doesnt happen with apache only set up? Any idea why it is happening with nginx? this was happening even i removed all external js from the page

  Read the article

• Work firewall blocking Gmail IMAP port

  - by Sean

  My work has a very over protective firewall. We use Google Apps for our email and so can access the web interface just fine. I use my laptop at work however (MacBook connected via WiFi through my AirPort Express), and prefer to use Sparrow to check my email. The problem is that our firewall blocks whatever port Gmail's IMAP server uses. I'm trying to figure out the easiest way to work around this. I'm guessing I'll need to use an SSH tunnel or VPN, but I'm looking for specific instructions. I'd prefer to only route the IMAP stuff around the firewall as opposed to using a VPN full time. I have two computers at home (one PC, one Mac Mini) that are always on and could probably act as a server if needed.

  Read the article

• iis7 large worker process request queue creating process blocking aspnet.config & machine.config amended (bottleneck)

  - by scott_lotus

  ASP.net 2.0 app .net 2.0 framework IIS7 I am seeing a large queue of "requests" appear under the "worker process" option. State recorded appear to be Authenticate Request and Execute Request Handles more than anything else. I have amended aspnet.config in C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v2.0.50727 (32 bit path and 64 bit path) to include: maxConcurrentRequestsPerCPU="50000" maxConcurrentThreadsPerCPU="0" requestQueueLimit="50000" I have amended machine.config in C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v2.0.50727\CONFIG (32 bit and 64 bit path) to include: autoConfig="true" maxIoThreads="100" maxWorkerThreads="100" minIoThreads="50" minWorkerThreads="50" minFreeThreads="176" minLocalRequestFreeThreads="152" Still i get the issue. The issue manifestes itself as a large number of processes in the Worker Process queue. Number of current connections to the website display 500 when this issue occurs. I dont think i have seen concurrent connections over 500 without this issue occurring. Web application slows as the request block. Refreshing the app pool resolves for a while (as expected) as the load is spread between the two pools. Application pool in question FIXED REQUEST have been set to refresh on 50000. Thank you for any help. Scott quick edit to say hmm, my develeopers are telling me the project was built with .net 3.5 framework. Looking at C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v3.5 there does not appear to be a ASPNET.CONFIG or a MACHINE.CONFIG .... is there a 3.5 equivalent ? after a little searching apparenetly 3.5 uses the 2.0 framework files that 3.5 is missing. So back to the original question , where is my bottleneck ?

  Read the article

• Minimize the chance my email is blocked/filtered as spam

  - by justSteve

  I'm running a web-based store where order confirmations are sometimes blocked and don't reach the intended user. The structure of the business model is such that our product is marketed to the end-user by a 3rd parities - affiliates how are known entities to the end-users and email is freely exchanged between end-users and our affiliates. Our confirmations being blocked is becoming a big enough problem that we are considering implementing a system where a 'confirmations' address is created within the affiliates domain, then we'd have our app send via the affiliate's mail server instead of our own. But that'd be lots of work. The idea has been raised to have our app use our affiliates' email in the FROM field but still send from our server. My thinking is that would be detected at the end-users side and blocked just as often - we dealing with institutions large enough at least some checks up at the perimeter. Is this assumption correct (more likely to be blocked) or is there a less round about way to send messages under the auspices of 3rd parties? thx

  Read the article

• Bypass spam check for Auth users in postfix

  - by magiza83

  I would like to know if there is any option to "FILTER" auth users in postfix. Let me explain me better, I have the amavis and dspam services between postfix(25) and postfix(10026) but I would like to avoid this check if the users are authenticated. postfix(25)->policyd(10031)->amavis(10024)->postfix(10025)->dspam(dspam.sock)->postfix(10026)--->cyrus | /|\ |________auth users______________________________________________________________| my conf is: main.cf ... smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes smtpd_sasl_security_options = noanonymous broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes smtpd_sasl_path = smtpd smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, reject_unauth_destination, check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:10040, reject_invalid_hostname, reject_rbl_client multi.uribl.com, reject_rbl_client dsn.rfc-ignorant.org, reject_rbl_client dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net, reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, reject_rbl_client sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net, reject_rbl_client dnsbl.sorbs.net, reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org, reject_rbl_client ix.dnsbl.manitu.net, reject_rbl_client combined.rbl.msrbl.net, reject_rbl_client rabl.nuclearelephant.com, check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:10031, permit_mynetworks, reject ... I would like something like "FILTER smtp:localhost:10026" in case they are authenticated, because in my actual configuration i'm only avoiding policyd, but not amavis and dspam. Thanks.

  Read the article

• SELinux blocking Samba directory listing

  - by Sean M

  I am running Samba on a CentOS server, and I am experiencing a problem where it allows me to connect to the server and see a share, but shows the share as an empty directory. I find this behavior strange. Here is the stanza in my smb.conf for the given share: [seanm] path = /home/seanm writeable = yes valid users = seanm, root read only = No Here's what I see on the server side: [seanm@server ~]$ ls -l -rw-r--r-- 1 seanm seanm 40 Jan 4 13:45 pangram.txt And yet: [seanm@client ~]$ smbclient //server/seanm -U seanm -W WORKGROUP Enter seanm's password: Domain=[WORKGROUP] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samba 3.0.33-3.29.el5_5.1] smb: \> ls . D 0 Fri Jan 7 10:08:55 2011 .. D 0 Fri Jan 7 07:58:31 2011 58994 blocks of size 262144. 50356 blocks available This behavior is present on both a Windows client and a Linux client system. The behavior is present with the firewall on and with the firewall off, so it's not that. Neither /var/log/messages nor /var/log/secure have any complaints about Samba. I doubt that SELinux is a problem: just in case, here are the relevant settings. [root@server ~]# getsebool -a | grep samba samba_domain_controller --> off samba_enable_home_dirs --> on samba_export_all_ro --> off samba_export_all_rw --> off samba_share_fusefs --> off samba_share_nfs --> off use_samba_home_dirs --> on virt_use_samba --> off What am I doing wrong here, and what can I do to fix it? Edit: SELinux probably is the problem, judging by the fact that the issue goes away when I set SELinux to "permissive" or issue setsebool -P samba_export_all_rw on - both of which are unacceptable for production environments. What the heck kind of context does a directory need to have on it for Samba users to actually get files from it? I consider rolling your own rules and/or context to be deeply sub-optimal.

  Read the article

• Windows 2003 R2 zip program blocking EXE file

  - by Harvey Kwok

  I have a Windows 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition SP2 32-bit machine with all latest patch (as of 1-6-2011). It's a VM. I have a zip file, including a pdf file, a txt file and a exe file. If I copy the zip file onto the machine via a shared network drive, I can unzip all the files properly without problems. If I put the zip file on my web server and then I download it from there, I can only unzip the pdf file and txt file. The exe file is silently ignored. I searched the web and found somebody reporting similar issue on XP. If I right click on the zip file downloaded from the web server, at the bottom of the general page, it has a warning message saying that "This file came from antoher computer and might be blocked to help protect this computer" I understand that I can solve the problem by simply clicking the "Unblock" button and extract the file again. The things that bothering me is that why the warning message says "might be blocked"? I tried downloading the same zip file from the same web server on to my Windows 7 box with latest patch. It also shows the same warning message. However, even with the warning message, I can extract all the files properly without clicking the "Unblock" button. Is it a bug in Windows 2003 R2 SP1? Is there any security settings controlling this? How likely will the end user seeing this problem? I want to dig into this because I am worrying people downloading my zip file from my web server might see similar problems. The first thought coming to the user's mind will be the zip file is somehow corrupted. Honestly, I didn't know this "Unblock" feature in Windows before I run into this problem. EDIT I just tried it on another Windows 2003 R2 SP1 machine. The zip program doesn't block the EXE file on that machine either. Both Windows 2003 R2 SP1 machines are joining to the same forest.

  Read the article

• Call to daemon in a /etc/init.d script is blocking, not running in background

  - by tony

  I have a Perl script that I want to daemonize. Basically this perl script will read a directory every 30 seconds, read the files that it finds and then process the data. To keep it simple here consider the following Perl script (called synpipe_server, there is a symbolic link of this script in /usr/sbin/) : #!/usr/bin/perl use strict; use warnings; my $continue = 1; $SIG{'TERM'} = sub { $continue = 0; print "Caught TERM signal\n"; }; $SIG{'INT'} = sub { $continue = 0; print "Caught INT signal\n"; }; my $i = 0; while ($continue) { #do stuff print "Hello, I am running " . ++$i . "\n"; sleep 3; } So this script basically prints something every 3 seconds. Then, as I want to daemonize this script, I've also put this bash script (also called synpipe_server) in /etc/init.d/ : #!/bin/bash # synpipe_server : This starts and stops synpipe_server # # chkconfig: 12345 12 88 # description: Monitors all production pipelines # processname: synpipe_server # pidfile: /var/run/synpipe_server.pid # Source function library. . /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions pname="synpipe_server" exe="/usr/sbin/synpipe_server" pidfile="/var/run/${pname}.pid" lockfile="/var/lock/subsys/${pname}" [ -x $exe ] || exit 0 RETVAL=0 start() { echo -n "Starting $pname : " daemon ${exe} RETVAL=$? PID=$! echo [ $RETVAL -eq 0 ] && touch ${lockfile} echo $PID > ${pidfile} } stop() { echo -n "Shutting down $pname : " killproc ${exe} RETVAL=$? echo if [ $RETVAL -eq 0 ]; then rm -f ${lockfile} rm -f ${pidfile} fi } restart() { echo -n "Restarting $pname : " stop sleep 2 start } case "$1" in start) start ;; stop) stop ;; status) status ${pname} ;; restart) restart ;; *) echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop|status|restart}" ;; esac exit 0 So, (if I have well understood the doc for daemon) the Perl script should run in the background and the output should be redirected to /dev/null if I execute : service synpipe_server start But here is what I get instead : [root@master init.d]# service synpipe_server start Starting synpipe_server : Hello, I am running 1 Hello, I am running 2 Hello, I am running 3 Hello, I am running 4 Caught INT signal [ OK ] [root@master init.d]# So it starts the Perl script but runs it without detaching it from the current terminal session, and I can see the output printed in my console ... which is not really what I was expecting. Moreover, the PID file is empty (or with a line feed only, no pid returned by daemon). Does anyone have any idea of what I am doing wrong ? EDIT : maybe I should say that I am on a Red Hat machine. Scientific Linux SL release 5.4 (Boron) Would it do the job if instead of using the daemon function, I use something like : nohup ${exe} >/dev/null 2>&1 & in the init script ?

  Read the article

• iptables blocking ssh communication

  - by Michal Sapsa

  I'm using this script for iptables: #!/bin/sh echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward iptables -F iptables -X iptables -F -t nat iptables -X -t nat iptables -F -t filter iptables -X -t filter iptables -t filter -P FORWARD DROP iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -s 192.168.0.0/255.255.0.0 -d 0/0 -j ACCEPT iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -s 0/0 -d 192.168.0.0/255.255.0.0 -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.1/255.255.255.0 -j MASQUERADE iptables -A FORWARD -s 10.8.0.1/255.255.255.0 -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.0.0/24 -d 0/0 -j MASQUERADE iptables -I FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS --clamp-mss-to-pmtu iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth1 -p udp --dport 16161 -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.251:16161 iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth1 -p udp --sport 16161 -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.251:16161 #openvpn iptables -I INPUT -p tcp --dport 1194 -j ACCEPT iptables -I INPUT -p udp --dport 1194 -j ACCEPT I end up with some iptables rules that should work but don't work - probably because of me. # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Mon May 26 13:15:43 2014 *raw :PREROUTING ACCEPT [1657523:1357257330] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [36804:34834370] -A PREROUTING -p icmp -j TRACE -A PREROUTING -p tcp -j TRACE -A OUTPUT -p icmp -j TRACE -A OUTPUT -p tcp -j TRACE COMMIT # Completed on Mon May 26 13:15:43 2014 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Mon May 26 13:15:43 2014 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [5033:345623] :INPUT ACCEPT [154:34662] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [6:1968] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [2:120] -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 16161 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.0.251:22 -A PREROUTING -i eth1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 16161 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.0.251:22 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -j MASQUERADE -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.0.0/24 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT # Completed on Mon May 26 13:15:44 2014 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Mon May 26 13:15:44 2014 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [548:69692] :FORWARD DROP [8:384] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [2120:1097479] -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 1194 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1194 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -p tcp -m tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS --clamp-mss-to-pmtu -A FORWARD -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -d 192.168.0.0/16 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -s 10.8.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT COMMIT TRACE at PREROUTEING AND OUTPUT are only for debuging this thing. When I ssh at public ip with port 16161 I don't get any message, only TimeOut so it looks like I don't get communication back to remote server. ETH0 is the world, ETH1 is LAN Any IPTABLES Masters willing to give a hand ? iptables -vL Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 20548 packets, 3198K bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 38822 7014K ACCEPT udp -- any any anywhere anywhere udp dpt:openvpn 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- any any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:openvpn Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 1129 packets, 64390 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 214K 11M TCPMSS tcp -- any any anywhere anywhere tcpflags: SYN,RST/SYN TCPMSS clamp to PMTU 4565K 1090M ACCEPT all -- any any 192.168.0.0/16 anywhere 5916K 7315M ACCEPT all -- any any anywhere 192.168.0.0/16 0 0 ACCEPT all -- any any 10.8.0.0/24 anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- any any anywhere 192.168.0.251 tcp dpt:16161 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 59462 packets, 19M bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination

  Read the article

• hosts.deny not blocking ip addresses

  - by Jamie

  I have the following in my /etc/hosts.deny file # # hosts.deny This file describes the names of the hosts which are # *not* allowed to use the local INET services, as decided # by the '/usr/sbin/tcpd' server. # # The portmap line is redundant, but it is left to remind you that # the new secure portmap uses hosts.deny and hosts.allow. In particular # you should know that NFS uses portmap! ALL:ALL and this in /etc/hosts.allow # # hosts.allow This file describes the names of the hosts which are # allowed to use the local INET services, as decided # by the '/usr/sbin/tcpd' server. # ALL:xx.xx.xx.xx , xx.xx.xxx.xx , xx.xx.xxx.xxx , xx.x.xxx.xxx , xx.xxx.xxx.xxx but i am still getting lots of these emails: Time: Thu Feb 10 13:39:55 2011 +0000 IP: 202.119.208.220 (CN/China/-) Failures: 5 (sshd) Interval: 300 seconds Blocked: Permanent Block Log entries: Feb 10 13:39:52 ds-103 sshd[12566]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.119.208.220 user=root Feb 10 13:39:52 ds-103 sshd[12567]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.119.208.220 user=root Feb 10 13:39:52 ds-103 sshd[12568]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.119.208.220 user=root Feb 10 13:39:52 ds-103 sshd[12571]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.119.208.220 user=root Feb 10 13:39:53 ds-103 sshd[12575]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.119.208.220 user=root whats worse is csf is trying to auto block these ip's when the attempt to get in but although it does put ip's in the csf.deny file they do not get blocked either So i am trying to block all ip's with /etc/hosts.deny and allow only the ip's i use with /etc/hosts.allow but so far it doesn't seem to work. right now i'm having to manually block each one with iptables, I would rather it automatically block the hackers in case I was away from a pc or asleep

  Read the article

• Iptables blocking mysql port 3306

  - by valmar

  I got a Tomcat server running a web application that must access a mysql server via Hibernate on the same machine. So, I added a rule for port 3306 to my iptables script but tomcat cannot connect to the mysql server for some reason. I need to reset all iptables rules - Then tomcat can connect to the mysql server again. All the other iptables rules work perfectly though. What's wrong? Here is my script: iptables -A INPUT -m conntrack --ctstate ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 24 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -s localhost --dport 8009 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -d localhost --dport 8009 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -s localhost --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -d localhost --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 25 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 25 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 587 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 587 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 465 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 465 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 110 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 110 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 995 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 995 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 143 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 143 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 993 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 993 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -j DROP My /etc/hosts file: # nameserver config # IPv4 127.0.0.1 localhost 46.4.7.93 mydomain.com 46.4.7.93 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal 46.4.7.93 horst # IPv6 ::1 ip6-localhost ip6-loopback fe00::0 ip6-localnet ff00::0 ip6-mcastprefix ff02::1 ip6-allnodes ff02::2 ip6-allrouters ff02::3 ip6-allhosts Having a look into the iptables logs, gives me this: Jun 22 16:52:43 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 435.111780] denied-input IN=lo OUT= MAC=00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:08:00 SRC=127.0.0.1 DST=127.0.0.1 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=52432 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56108 DPT=8009 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Jun 22 16:52:46 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 438.110555] denied-input IN=lo OUT= MAC=00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:08:00 SRC=127.0.0.1 DST=127.0.0.1 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=52433 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56108 DPT=8009 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Jun 22 16:52:46 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 438.231954] denied-input IN=lo OUT= MAC=00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:08:00 SRC=127.0.0.1 DST=127.0.0.1 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=48020 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56109 DPT=8009 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Jun 22 16:52:49 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 441.229778] denied-input IN=lo OUT= MAC=00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:08:00 SRC=127.0.0.1 DST=127.0.0.1 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=48021 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=56109 DPT=8009 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Jun 22 16:53:57 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 508.731839] denied-input IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=6c:62:6d:85:bf:0e:00:26:88:75:dc:01:08:00 SRC=78.92.97.67 DST=46.4.7.93 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=122 ID=23053 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=1672 DPT=445 WINDOW=65535 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Jun 22 16:53:59 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 511.625038] denied-input IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=6c:62:6d:85:bf:0e:00:26:88:75:dc:01:08:00 SRC=78.92.97.67 DST=46.4.7.93 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=122 ID=23547 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=1672 DPT=445 WINDOW=65535 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Jun 22 16:54:22 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 533.981995] denied-input IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=6c:62:6d:85:bf:0e:00:26:88:75:dc:01:08:00 SRC=27.254.39.16 DST=46.4.7.93 LEN=48 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=117 ID=6549 PROTO=TCP SPT=6005 DPT=33796 WINDOW=64240 RES=0x00 ACK SYN URGP=0 Jun 22 16:54:44 Ubuntu-1004-lucid-64-minimal kernel: [ 556.297038] denied-input IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=6c:62:6d:85:bf:0e:00:26:88:75:dc:01:08:00 SRC=94.78.93.41 DST=46.4.7.93 LEN=40 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=52 ID=7712 PROTO=TCP SPT=57598 DPT=445 WINDOW=512 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0

  Read the article

• Blocking IP Range in .htaccess Problem

  - by Pedro

  Hi, I'm trying to block the access of one of my webapps using IP Filter in the .htaccess, the problem is that after updating the file with: order allow,deny deny from 58.14.0.0/15 allow from all I get the folowing error: Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Please contact the server administrator, [email protected] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error. More information about this error may be available in the server error log. What is wrong? Regards, Pedro

  Read the article

• What is blocking incoming packets to port 67?

  - by Peter Robertson

  I have a DSP connected to a Windows 7 laptop by Ethernet. The laptop has all firewalls disabled (I've even tried stopping the Windows firewall service and DHCP). The DSP is sending well-formed BOOTP broadcast packets every 3 seconds to port 67. Wireshark running on the laptop sees these BOOTP packets coming in. I have a program running on the laptop with a socket successfully bound to port 67. I can see this using CurrPorts.exe. Nothing else is shown as accessing port 67. The program never sees any packets coming in. If I run a program in the DSP that sends ordinary UDP packets to port 67, Wireshark sees them coming in and reports that they are corrupt BOOTP packets, but now, my program gets them. Any idea what's going on here?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >