Search Results

Search found 1249 results on 50 pages for 'iptables'.

Page 6/50 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • iptables management tools for large scale environment

    - by womble
    The environment I'm operating in is a large-scale web hosting operation (several hundred servers under management, almost-all-public addressing, etc -- so anything that talks about managing ADSL links is unlikely to work well), and we're looking for something that will be comfortable managing both the core ruleset (around 12,000 entries in iptables at current count) plus the host-based rulesets we manage for customers. Our core router ruleset changes a few times a day, and the host-based rulesets would change maybe 50 times a month (across all the servers, so maybe one change per five servers per month). We're currently using filtergen (which is balls in general, and super-balls at our scale of operation), and I've used shorewall in the past at other jobs (which would be preferable to filtergen, but I figure there's got to be something out there that's better than that). The "musts" we've come up with for any replacement system are: Must generate a ruleset fairly quickly (a filtergen run on our ruleset takes 15-20 minutes; this is just insane) -- this is related to the next point: Must generate an iptables-restore style file and load that in one hit, not call iptables for every rule insert Must not take down the firewall for an extended period while the ruleset reloads (again, this is a consequence of the above point) Must support IPv6 (we aren't deploying anything new that isn't IPv6 compatible) Must be DFSG-free Must use plain-text configuration files (as we run everything through revision control, and using standard Unix text-manipulation tools are our SOP) Must support both RedHat and Debian (packaged preferred, but at the very least mustn't be overtly hostile to either distro's standards) Must support the ability to run arbitrary iptables commands to support features that aren't part of the system's "native language" Anything that doesn't meet all these criteria will not be considered. The following are our "nice to haves": Should support config file "fragments" (that is, you can drop a pile of files in a directory and say to the firewall "include everything in this directory in the ruleset"; we use configuration management extensively and would like to use this feature to provide service-specific rules automatically) Should support raw tables Should allow you to specify particular ICMP in both incoming packets and REJECT rules Should gracefully support hostnames that resolve to more than one IP address (we've been caught by this one a few times with filtergen; it's a rather royal pain in the butt) The more optional/weird iptables features that the tool supports (either natively or via existing or easily-writable plugins) the better. We use strange features of iptables now and then, and the more of those that "just work", the better for everyone.

    Read the article

  • iptables captive portal remove user

    - by Burgos
    I followed this guide: http://aryo.info/labs/captive-portal-using-php-and-iptables.html I am implementing captive portal using iptables. I've setup web server and iptables on linux router, and everything is working as it should. I can allow user to access internet with sudo iptables -I internet -t mangle -m mac --mac-source USER_MAC_ADDRESS -j RETURN and I can remove access with sudo iptables -D internet -t mangle -m mac --mac-source USER_MAC_ADDRESS -j RETURN However, on removal, user can still open last viewed page as many times he wants (if he restart his Ethernet adapter, future connections will be closed). On blog page I found a script /usr/sbin/conntrack -L \ |grep $1 \ |grep ESTAB \ |grep 'dport=80' \ |awk \ "{ system(\"conntrack -D --orig-src $1 --orig-dst \" \ substr(\$6,5) \" -p tcp --orig-port-src \" substr(\$7,7) \" \ --orig-port-dst 80\"); }" Which should remove their "redirection" connection track, as it is written, but when I execute that script, nothing happens - user still have access to that page. When I execute /usr/sbin/conntrack -L | grep USER_IP after executing script I am having nothing returned, so my questions: Is there anything else that can help me clean these track? Obviously - I can't reset nor mine, nor users network adapter.

    Read the article

  • Iptables based router inside KVM virtual machine

    - by Anton
    I have KVM virtual machine (CentOS 6.2 x64), it has 2 NIC: eth0 - real external IP 1.2.3.4 (simplified example instead of real one) eth1 - local internal IP 172.16.0.1 Now I'm trying to make port mapping 1.2.3.4:80 = 172.16.0.2:80 Current iptables rules: # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Fri Jun 29 17:53:36 2012 *nat :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :PREROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp -d 1.2.3.4 --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 172.16.0.2:80 COMMIT # Completed on Fri Jun 29 17:53:36 2012 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Fri Jun 29 17:53:36 2012 *mangle :PREROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] COMMIT # Completed on Fri Jun 29 17:53:36 2012 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Fri Jun 29 17:53:36 2012 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] COMMIT # Completed on Fri Jun 29 17:53:36 2012 But there is nothing works, I mean it does not forwards that port. Similar configuration without virtualization seems to be working. What am I missing? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Iptables rule creation error: No chain/target/match by that name

    - by MikO
    I'm trying to create my first VPN on a VPS with CentOS 6, following this tutorial. When I have to create an iptables rule to allow proper routing of VPN subnet, with this command: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE It throws this error: iptables: No chain/target/match by that name I was searching and I've found that this error is usually thrown when you misspell something, but as far as I understand, the rule is correct...

    Read the article

  • Packets being dropped by iptables

    - by Shadyabhi
    I am trying to create a Software Access Point in linux. I followed the blog here. Steps I performed: Started dhcp server on wlan0. Properly configured hostapd.conf Enabled packet forwarding & masquerading. Two commands executed regarding iptables: iptables --table nat --append POSTROUTING --out-interface eth0 -j MASQUERADE iptables --append FORWARD --in-interface wlan0 -j ACCEPT I enabled logging on iptables & I get this in everything.log Jun 29 19:42:03 MBP-archlinux kernel: [10480.180356] IN=eth0 OUT=wlan0 MAC=c8:bc:c8:9b:c4:3c:00:13:80:40:cd:80:08:00 SRC=195.143.92.150 DST=10.0.0.3 LEN=44 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=52 ID=38025 PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=53570 WINDOW=46185 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Jun 29 19:42:03 MBP-archlinux kernel: [10480.389102] IN=eth0 OUT=wlan0 MAC=c8:bc:c8:9b:c4:3c:00:13:80:40:cd:80:08:00 SRC=195.143.92.150 DST=10.0.0.3 LEN=308 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=52 ID=14732 PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=53570 WINDOW=46185 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Jun 29 19:42:03 MBP-archlinux kernel: [10480.389710] IN=eth0 OUT=wlan0 MAC=c8:bc:c8:9b:c4:3c:00:13:80:40:cd:80:08:00 SRC=195.143.92.150 DST=10.0.0.3 LEN=44 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=52 ID=14988 PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=53570 WINDOW=46185 RES=0x00 ACK FIN URGP=0 Jun 29 19:42:03 MBP-archlinux kernel: [10480.621118] IN=eth0 OUT=wlan0 MAC=c8:bc:c8:9b:c4:3c:00:13:80:40:cd:80:08:00 SRC=195.143.92.150 DST=10.0.0.3 LEN=44 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=52 ID=63378 PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=53570 WINDOW=46185 RES=0x00 ACK FIN URGP=0 I have almost no knowledge of iptables, all I did was through googling. So, can anyone help me in making me understand what wrong is happening here? I have tried running tcpdump on wlan0 & http packets are being sent from wlan0.

    Read the article

  • Iptables rules, forward between two interfaces

    - by Marco
    i have a some difficulties in configuring my ubuntu server firewall ... my situation is this: eth0 - internet eth1 - lan1 eth2 - lan2 I want that clients from lan1 can't communicate with clients from lan2, except for some specific services. E.g. i want that clients in lan1 can ssh into client in lan2, but only that. Any other comunication is forbidden. So, i add this rules to iptables: #Block all traffic between lan, but permit traffic to internet iptables -I FORWARD -i eth1 -o ! eth0 -j DROP iptables -I FORWARD -i eth2 -o ! eth0 -j DROP # Accept ssh traffic from lan1 to client 192.168.20.2 in lan2 iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth2 -p tcp --dport 22 -d 192.168.20.2 -j ACCEPT This didn't works. Doing iptables -L FORWARD -v i see: Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 33 144 DROP all -- eth1 !eth0 anywhere anywhere 0 0 DROP all -- eth2 !eth0 anywhere anywhere 23630 20M ACCEPT all -- any any anywhere anywhere state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT all -- eth1 any anywhere anywhere 175 9957 ACCEPT all -- eth1 any anywhere anywhere 107 6420 ACCEPT all -- eth2 any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT all -- pptp+ any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT all -- tun+ any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth1 eth2 anywhere server2.lan tcp dpt:ssh All packets are dropped, and the count of packets for the last rule is 0 ... How i have to modify my configuration? Thank you. Regards Marco

    Read the article

  • Centos iptables configuration for Wordpress and Gmail smtp

    - by Fabrizio
    Let me start off by saying that I'm a Centos newby, so all info, links and suggestions are very welcome! I recently set up a hosted server with Centos 6 and configured it as a webserver. The websites running on it are nothing special, just some low traffic projects. I tried to configure the server as default as possible, but I like it to be secure as well (no ftp, custom ssh port). Getting my Wordpress to run as desired, I'm running into some connection problems. 2 things are not working: installing plugins and updates through ssh2 (failed to connect to localhost:sshportnumber) sending emails from my site using the Gmail smtp (Failed to connect to server: Permission denied (13)) I have the feeling that these are both related to the iptables configuration, because I've tried everything else (I think). I tried opening up the firewall to accept traffic for ports 465 (gmail smtp) and ssh port (lets say this port is 8000), but both the issues remain. Ssh connections from the terminal are working fine though. After each change I tried implementing I restarted the iptables service. This is my iptables configuration (using vim): # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Sun Jun 1 13:20:20 2014 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8000 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 465 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A FORWARD -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A OUTPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8000 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 465 -j ACCEPT COMMIT # Completed on Sun Jun 1 13:20:20 2014 Are there any (obvious) issues with my iptables setup considering the above mentioned issues? Saying that the firewall is doing exactly nothing in this state is also an answer... And again, if you have any other suggestions for me to increase security (considering the basic things I do with this box), I would love hear it, also the obvious ones! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • setup advanced filtering and access restrictions on dd-wrt using iptables

    - by Nova deViator
    I have a linksys WRT54GL router with a DD-WRT installed and I want to setup some advanced filtering that seem to not be available through "Access restrictions" web gui option. I guess I would be using IPTABLES then. I have ssh access to router and can run iptables, but I'm not so experienced with iptables. So here are my needs: my policy would be deny all first and then allow exceptions allow all http (port 80) access to WAN through wireless allow all other traffic only to PCs with specific MAC addresses allow internet access to PC with specific MAC address according to schedule (let's say everyday between 18:00-21:00) is this possible to setup with IPtables? could somebody help me a bit with it? or should go and RTFM?

    Read the article

  • Iptables Allow MYSQL server incoming requests

    - by thompatry
    I am trying to get my new MediaWiki server to allow connections to our MySql Server and right now I cannot get my iptables firewall set up right for this. The rule I am applying is the following iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -d 129.130.155.39 --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT # MySQL But my iptables log is still show that the connections can not be established and is being blocked/denied. Nov 21 09:48:39 hds-it kernel: Firewall Deny: [OUTPUT] IN= OUT=eth1 SRC=129.130.155.210 DST=129.130.155.39 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=29232 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=58862 DPT=3306 SEQ=914529531 ACK=0 WINDOW=14600 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 OPT (020405B40402080A03BCF2BC0000000001030307) When I turn off iptables, everything works as it should including editing the wiki database. What am I doing wrong with my rule.

    Read the article

  • Iptables string

    - by Mr. BeatMasta
    I have an iptables rule like this: iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 80 -s 192.168.1.2 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.1:80 it works perfectly.. but I want to redirect only for one URL like this: iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 80 -s 192.168.1.2 -m string --string "google.com" -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.1:80 which does not work in any way... please help me with this

    Read the article

  • Cannot redirect ip traffic with iptables to new ip on linux centOS

    - by Kiwi
    today I able to migrate some of the game servers to another server and needed some help to redirect the traffic from old ip to the new one. SERVER1 1.1.1.1 ----- (internet ) ----- SERVER 2.2.2.2 I asume to use iptables to perform this, for that used this rule on my centOS box in the server1. /etc/sysctl.conf: net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp --dest 1.1.1.1 --dport 27015 -j DNAT --to-destination 2.2.2.2:27015 iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -j MASQUERADE iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -d 2.2.2.2 -p udp --dport 27015 -j SNAT --to 1.1.1.1 But the client cannot connect to the server from the old ip, the redirection don't started.

    Read the article

  • Most secure way to have IPtables auto-loaded using Debian / Linux

    - by networkIT
    I'd like to know the safest way to load iptables using Debian. Of course, I can use a script that uses iptables-restore : #!/bin/sh iptables-restore < /etc/firewall.conf but : 1) where is the safest place to have it loaded ? /etc/network/if-up.d ? I'm concerned about the script being loaded early enough at boot time, and reliably enough when plugging/unplugging interfaces ... 2) is this script method using iptables-restore the most secure way ? 3) additionnally, how much does the answer validity stretch to other Linux distros ( Ubuntu, Fedora, CentOS ) ? Thanks ^^

    Read the article

  • Can't get iptables firewall working correctly

    - by Jay
    I'm setting up a new Centos 5.6 system and can't get my iptables firewall to work correctly. it won't let me use SSH through it. I'm new to Centos but not to Linux or iptables. I've been removing things until I have isolated the problem. I set up the firewall with a default ACCEPT rule for the INPUT chain. I can connect through to the server fine. If I change the command to only allow traffic from the interface connecting to my trusted network it stops working. Working: iptables -A INPUT -s 0/0 -d 0/0 -j ACCEPT Failing: iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -s 0/0 -d 0/0 -j ACCEPT I've double checked the ip address I'm using corresponds to eth0 using ifconfig. Any ideas where I went wrong?

    Read the article

  • Modifying one line in Iptables

    - by Rene Brakus
    How would one modify the following line in iptables file (debian)? ACCEPT all -- XXX.XXX.XX.X anywhere PHYSDEV match --physdev-in vif3.1 TO ACCEPT all -- YYY.YYY.YY.Y anywhere PHYSDEV match --physdev-in vif3.1 I looked up the https://wiki.debian.org/iptables and I'm having hard time figuring out how to exactly do this modification. Can it be done using one command, or there is a way to temporally "extract" the iptables file and modify it using nano or vi, and put it back in place?

    Read the article

  • Need help translating rate limiting iptables rules to Puppet format

    - by geoffroy
    I use Puppet Iptables module to manage Iptables rules on my machine. I'd like to implement to rate limit failed SSH connections as described here : Hundreds of failed ssh logins iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -m recent --update --seconds 60 --hitcount 5 --name SSH --rsource -j DROP iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -m recent --set --name SSH --rsource -j ACCEPT Is it possible to translate it to Puppet syntax, such as firewall { '015 drop 5 failed attemps to connect to SSH in a minute ': proto => 'tcp', port => 22, action => 'drop', // what are the other paramters ? } Any help welcome. Best regards Geoffroy

    Read the article

  • Can not open port 3306 on Ubuntu using iptables

    - by user94626
    I am trying to open port 3306 (for remote mysql connections) on my ubuntu 12.04 server machine but for the life of me can't get the damned thing to work! Here is what I did: 1) list current firewall rules: $> sudo iptables -nL -v output: Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 225 16984 fail2ban-ssh tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 22 220 69605 ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 REJECT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 127.0.0.0/8 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable 486 54824 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 1 60 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 19 988 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:443 1 52 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:22 0 0 ACCEPT icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmptype 8 4 208 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 5/min burst 5 LOG flags 0 level 7 prefix "iptables denied: " 4 208 REJECT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 REJECT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 735 182K ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain fail2ban-ssh (1 references) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 225 16984 RETURN all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 2) try to connect from remote machine: $> mysql -u root -p -h x.x.x.x output: timeout.... failed to connect 3) try to add a new rule to iptables: iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT 4) make sure the new rule is added: $> sudo iptables -nL -v output: Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 359 25972 fail2ban-ssh tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 22 251 78665 ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 REJECT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 127.0.0.0/8 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable 628 64420 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 1 60 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 19 988 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:443 1 52 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:22 0 0 ACCEPT icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmptype 8 5 260 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 5/min burst 5 LOG flags 0 level 7 prefix "iptables denied: " 5 260 REJECT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:3306 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 REJECT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 919 213K ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain fail2ban-ssh (1 references) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 359 25972 RETURN all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 which appears to be the case (last line in "Chain INPUT" section). 5) try to connect again from remote machine: $> mysql -u root -p -h x.x.x.x output: timeout.... failed to connect which is failing again. 6) try to flush all rules: $> sudo iptables -F 7) this time I CAN CONNECT. 8) reboot server and try to connect, FAILURE. I suspect since the new rule is being appended at the end it will have no effect as there appears to be a "reject all" sort of rule before it. If this is the case, how to make sure the new rule is added in the right order? Otherwise, what am I missing? Please help.

    Read the article

  • iptables to allow input and output traffic to and from web server only

    - by Caedmon
    I have an Elastic Search server which seems to have been exploited (it's being used for a DDoS attack having had NO firewall for about a month). As a temporary measure while I create a new one I was hoping to block all traffic to and from the server which wasn't coming from or going to our web server. Will these iptables rules achieve this: iptables -I INPUT \! --src 1.2.3.4 -m tcp -p tcp --dport 9200 -j DROP iptables -P FORWARD \! --src 1.2.3.4 DROP iptables -P OUTPUT \! --src 1.2.3.4 DROP The first rule is tried and tested but obviously wasn't preventing traffic coming from my server to other IP addresses so I was hoping I could add the second two rules to full secure it.

    Read the article

  • Configuring iptables rules for HAProxy and others

    - by MLister
    I have the following relevant settings for HAProxy: defaults log global mode http option httplog option dontlognull retries 3 option redispatch maxconn 500 contimeout 5s clitimeout 15s srvtimeout 15s frontend public bind *:80 option http-server-close option http-pretend-keepalive option forwardfor # ACLs ... I have three backends (including a Nginx server) configured in HAProxy, all listening on different ports of 127.0.0.1. And my iptables config is this: *filter # Allows all loopback (lo0) traffic and drop all traffic to 127/8 that doesn't use lo0 -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT # Accepts all established inbound connections -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allows all outbound traffic # You can modify this to only allow certain traffic -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # Allows HTTP and HTTPS connections from anywhere (the normal ports for websites) -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Allows SSH connections # # THE -dport NUMBER IS THE SAME ONE YOU SET UP IN THE SSHD_CONFIG FILE # -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 22 -j ACCEPT # Allow ping -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT # log iptables denied calls -A INPUT -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "iptables denied: " --log-level 7 # Reject all other inbound - default deny unless explicitly allowed policy -A INPUT -j REJECT -A FORWARD -j REJECT COMMIT My questions are: Would the above iptables config work with the settings/options in my HAProxy config? I am also runnning a postgres and a redis server on the same machine, what settings do I need to adjust for these two to enable them work with iptables?

    Read the article

  • Manually Editing iptables

    - by JamesB41
    I'm using CentOS. What I'm wondering is, what happens if I manually edit /etc/sysconfig/iptables and save it? Is that the definitive source? When I type iptables -L I get something that doesn't match the contents of that file. Is there a way I can just edit the chains directly without adding/removing rules one at a time? i.e. open VIM and get everything set up the way I want it and then save. Along those lines, when I do something like iptables -A INPUT , where does that go in the immediate sense? Is it not applied until I do an iptables-save? I feel like I'm just missing an a-ha moment here and I can't seem to find the answer in a search.

    Read the article

  • VPN pptp connection Unable to pass through linux iptables

    - by user221844
    I have set up a windows VPN server behind Linux - Ubuntu box that is working as firewall and proxy server. Now I want people from outside to be able to connect to the VPN server, but the connection is not being established and I get on the client an error 619. I have checked the problem on the internet and it seems a firewall issue. what should I do to make the connection established through the firewall? here is below the information about my setup Firewall-External-IF-IP: 172.16.1.100 Firewall-LAN-IF-IP: 192.168.1.1 VPN-Server-IP: 192.168.1.10 and below is my iptables file content: #Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [162000:140437619] :FORWARD ACCEPT [23282:27196133] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [185778:143961739] :LOGGING - [0:0] -A INPUT -p gre -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 192.168.1.10/32 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 1723 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -s 192.168.1.10/32 -p udp -m udp --sport 1723 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -s 192.168.1.0/24 -o EXT_IF -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -s 192.168.1.0/24 -i EXT_IF -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -d 192.168.1.10/32 -i EXT_IF -o INT_IF -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1723 -m state --state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -s 192.168.1.10/32 -i INT_IF -o EXT_IF -p tcp -m tcp --sport 1723 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -d 192.168.1.10/32 -i EXT_IF -o INT_IF -p gre -m state --state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -s 192.168.1.10/32 -i INT_IF -o EXT_IF -p gre -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p gre -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -d 192.168.1.10/32 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1723 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -d 192.168.1.10/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 1723 -j ACCEPT COMMIT # Completed on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [17865:1053739] :INPUT ACCEPT [5490:357281] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [3723:223677] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [3726:223870] -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3128 -A PREROUTING -d 172.16.1.100/32 -i EXT_IF -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1723 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.10 -A PREROUTING -d 172.16.1.100/32 -i EXT_IF -p gre -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.10 -A PREROUTING -i -h -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.1.0/24 -o EXT_IF -j MASQUERADE COMMIT # Completed on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 *mangle :PREROUTING ACCEPT [22695965:17811993005] :INPUT ACCEPT [13818180:11522330171] :PREROUTING ACCEPT [17865:1053739] :INPUT ACCEPT [5490:357281] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [3723:223677] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [3726:223870] -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3128 -A PREROUTING -d 172.16.1.100/32 -i EXT_IF -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1723 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.10 -A PREROUTING -d 172.16.1.100/32 -i EXT_IF -p gre -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.10 -A PREROUTING -i -h -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.1.0/24 -o EXT_IF -j MASQUERADE COMMIT # Completed on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 *mangle :PREROUTING ACCEPT [22695965:17811993005] :INPUT ACCEPT [13818180:11522330171] :FORWARD ACCEPT [8527694:6271564562] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [14748508:11899678536] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [23271280:18170828012] COMMIT # Completed on Thu May 29 12:40:18 2014 hope that I find the solution here ....!! :(

    Read the article

  • debian gateway using iptables

    - by meijuh
    I am having problems setting up a debian gateway server. My goal: Having eth1 the WAN interface. Having eth0 the LAN interface. Allow both ports 22 (SSH) and 80 (HTTP) accessed from the outside world on the gateway (SSH and HTTP run on this server). What I did was the following: Create a file /etc/iptables.rules with contents: /etc/iptables.rules: *nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT *filter -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -j DROP COMMIT edit /etc/network/interfaces as follows: /etc/network/interfaces: # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback pre-up iptables-restore < /etc/iptables.rules auto eth0 allow-hotplug eth0 iface eth0 inet dhcp #auto eth1 #allow-hotplug eth1 #iface eth1 inet dhcp allow-hotplug eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 217.119.224.51 netmask 255.255.255.248 gateway 217.119.224.49 dns-nameservers 217.119.226.67 217.119.226.68 Uncomment the rule net.ipv4.ip_forward=1 in /etc/sysctl.conf to allow packet forwarding. The static settings for eth1 such as the ip address I got from my router (which I want to replace); I simply copied these. I have a (windows) DNS + DHCP server on ip address 10.180.1.10, which assigns ip address 10.180.1.44 to eth0. What this server does is not really interesting it only maps domain names on our local network and assigns one static ip to the gateway. What works: on the gateway itself I can ping 8.8.8.8 and google.nl. So that is okey. What does not work: (1) Every machine connected to eth0 (indirectly via a switch) can not ping an ip or a domain. So I guess the gateway can not be found. (2) Also when I configure my linux machine (a laptop) to use a static ip 10.180.1.41, a mask and a gateway (10.180.1.44) I can not ping an ip or domain either. This means that maybe my iptables is incorrect of not loaded correctly. Or I maybe have to configure my DNS/DHCP on my windows machine. I have not reset the windows machine net, restart the DNS/DHCP services, should I do this? I did not install dnsmasq as desribed here: http://blog.noviantech.com/2010/12/22/debian-router-gateway-in-15-minutes/. I don't think this is necessary?

    Read the article

  • NAT, iptables and problematic ports

    - by Rajie
    I am building a small office network with virtual machines. My schema is this: Computer A: gateway, ip 1.1.1.1, iptables used for NAT [eth0=public internet dhcp, dhcp; eth1=gateway] Computer B: client, ip 1.1.1.2, using gateway from Computer A. NAT is working, and Computer B can access the internet using the A's gateway. I redirected some incoming ports from A to B (for instance, if A receives a request to port 80, it goes automatically to Computer B's Apache). The thing is that I do not really understand how to open/close ports for Computer B from Computer A. I know how to close a port: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j DROP And it will refuse all incoming (not output) connections to port 80. However, this works for main interface eth0. I tried to, for instance, drop ingoing and outgoing connections for Computer B, port 80: iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DROP iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DROP But it does not work. And I cannot figure out what I am doing wrong. Any clue?

    Read the article

  • OSX: Mimic Ubuntu IP Masquerading via iptables with ipfw

    - by Dogbert
    Good day, I am attempting to replicate a setup I have between a router and an Ubuntu PC, and have the same setup working on my MacBook (10.6, Snow Leopard). First, I have a router that has a USB port. When I plug it into my Ubuntu PC, it creates an RNDIS connection, allowing me to connect to the router over the USB cable via an IP connection. When I plug it into my computer via USB, it gets assigned an IP address of 172.16.84.1, and a new adapter appears when I type ifconfig. I can then SSH into the device via ssh [email protected]. When I log in to the device, I flush the routes, then create the default route: admin@localhost> route -f admin@localhost> route add default 172.16.84.2 Now, in my Ubuntu machine, I use iptables to enable IP masquerading: root@Valhalla> sudo iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 172.16.84.2 -j MASQUERADE Once this is all done, the router has internet access over the USB connection to my PC. I am trying to replicate this exact setup on my MacBook now (Snow Leopard), but iptables does not exist for OSX, not even a Macports version exists. I have scoured through other questions on StackOverflow that cover the usage of the ipfw command, which apparently works as a drop-in replacement for iptables. However, the syntax is significantly different, and I'm pretty much lost. Does anyone with some experience with ipfw have some suggestions on how I could accomplish this and create a NAT connection via IP masquerading like I could with my Ubuntu PC? Thank you for your assistance.

    Read the article

  • Iptables: "-p udp --state ESTABLISHED"

    - by chris_l
    Hi, let's look at these two iptables rules which are often used to allow outgoing DNS: iptables -A OUTPUT -p udp --sport 1024:65535 --dport 53 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p udp --sport 53 --dport 1024:65535 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT My question is: How exactly should I understand the ESTABLISHED state in UDP? UDP is stateless. Here is my intuition - I'd like to know, if or where this is incorrect: The man page tells me this: state This module, when combined with connection tracking, allows access to the connection tracking state for this packet. --state ... So, iptables basically remembers the port number that was used for the outgoing packet (what else could it remember for a UDP packet?), and then allows the first incoming packet that is sent back within a short timeframe? An attacker would have to guess the port number (would that really be too hard?) About avoiding conflicts: The kernel keeps track of which ports are blocked (either by other services, or by previous outgoing UDP packets), so that these ports will not be used for new outgoing DNS packets within the timeframe? (What would happen, if I accidentally tried to start a service on that port within the timeframe - would that attempt be denied/blocked?) Please find all errors in the above text :-) Thanks, Chris

    Read the article

  • How can I write automated tests for iptables?

    - by Phil Frost
    I am configuring a Linux router with iptables. I want to write acceptance tests for the configuration that assert things like: traffic from some guy on the internet is not forwarded, and TCP to port 80 on the webserver in the DMZ from hosts on the corporate LAN is forwarded. An ancient FAQ alludes to a iptables -C option which allows one to ask something like, "given a packet from X, to Y, on port Z, would it be accepted or dropped?" Although the FAQ suggests it works like this, for iptables (but maybe not ipchains as it uses in the examples) the -C option seems to not simulate a test packet running through all the rules, but rather checks for the existence for an exactly matching rule. This has little value as a test. I want to assert that the rules have the desired effect, not just that they exist. I've considered creating yet more test VMs and a virtual network, then probing with tools like nmap for effects. However, I'm avoiding this solution due to the complexity of creating all those additional virtual machines, which is really quite a heavy way to generate some test traffic. It would also be nice to have an automated testing methodology which can also work on a real server in production. How else might I solve this problem? Is there some mechanism I might use to generate or simulate arbitrary traffic, then know if it was (or would be) dropped or accepted by iptables?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >