I don't have a shell on FC12 with me to show the output of iptables -L -n but it looks good after above 2 commands. However, after issuing the following third command iptables -L -n gives "wrong" result
Namely iptables -L -n gives extra "/0" after 127.0.0.1 in the output I have checked on Ubuntu 9.10 and centos 5.4 and they don't give extra "/0"; iptables is not supposed to do that. Of course, I didn't invent these examples but they are abstracted from actual real life scenerio of trying to build rules on our servers.
I'm using iptables with modules ip_contrack_ftp to be able to use passive ftp. It works well as long as port 21 is being used as listening port. Is there any way to make it work when I configure my ftp server (vsftpd) to listen on an alternative port, lets say 21001 or something? The helper module only seems to be working properly with the standard port, so I was wondering whether there was a way to "tell it" that another port is being used? I mean, of course I make a rule in fw to allow traffic to the alternative port.
But once it's time to start passive connection, then the iptable module cannot handle it properly. I could solve the problem by making a range of passive ports in the ftp-server configuration and allow the incoming traffic to them, but then using helper modules doesn't make any sense. I just want to allow the traffic to the listening port and then want the ip_contrack_ftp module to take care of the rest. This is what I do today - but only port 21 seems to be working. Is there a way to do this with a non-standard ftp port?
I'm following the "The Perfect Server - Fedora12 x86_64 [ISPConfig 3]" instructions and I am encountering an error when trying to build the rpm for courier-imap (from page 4 of the HOWTO).
I have been struggling with this for a very long time now. I have installed Fedora Core 9 on my computer. I have set it up as a caching-nameserver and this is working.
Then I wanted to secure my server with iptables, and I have so far made this script:
# Load the connection tracker kernel module modprobe ip_conntrack iptables -F iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -P FORWARD DROP
[Code]....
I can reach the dns server with ping. When trying Nslookup it says that it got SERVFAIL from 127.0.0.1 trying next server, and then it times out.
When I use system-config-firewall, it asks what interfaces to trust. Where does it store that information for iptables (or whatever uses that info)? How iptables knows at what interfaces to use the rules?There is not that kind of information in /etc/sysconf/iptables and iptables-config.
i've got a few questions about iptables. i know how to set up ip tables to only allow from an ip address or a subnetting ip addresses. question is how do i allow from 2 different networks? would i need to create 2 lines of entry in iptables to the same port? e: allow 10.168.1.1 and 196.168.1.1 on port 22 is there a way to put all that in 1 line or would i need to create to rules for the port? i know i can use the ssh allow or deny but i'd like to stop access even before it gets to the ssh. stop it at the source kinda thing.
Wondering if anyone knows what the range specification is meant to do for the colonHAIN at the top of the iptables file? e.g. what is the 1:76 range mean for :OUTPUT ACCEPT [1:76] ?
# Generated by iptables-save v1.4.1.1 on Sat Dec 19 12:28:00 2009 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0]
i was hoping that someone in here could possibly help me out with my iptables rule set. First here is what i would like iptables to do, i want iptables to deny all packets or traffic from the outside coming in and for output allow the things i need like web and irc etc... Also, i would like iptables to deny access to all services like sendmail and ssh except i would like localhost to have access to everything. What i mean by localhost is that when i run my iptables script it loads fine except when i try ssh from localhost i get this output:ssh -l user localhostssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote hostI know what most of you are thinking, why do i need to ssh into localhost from localhost just open another terminal, well i am getting myself familiar with iptables i want all services logged and blocked but not from localhost. I cant seem to figure out this problem and i have tried several different things. Here is my iptables script, I am hoping that someone out there can tell me what i am doing wrong...
#!/bin/bash iptables -v -F; iptables -v -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT;
i am learning security and firewalling. i want to know . where a linux firewall is sufficeint and where it is not sufficeint? if you can explain why or give a reference i will be glad. is that security or traffic handling problem? when i should select a cisco product? in tarms of traffic and sceutiry. do you have any good alternative recomendation to Cisco
I am using squid on my fedora box as a proxy server.By default the iptables (Firewall) service is on.To allow web pages to my client machines i stop the iptable service.
#service iptables stop
By doing it client computers start browsing.kindly how can I add a rule so that without stoping firewall client compter work fine.my perver IP address is 10.1.80.10
I have recently upgraded from FC12 to FC13, and last week I updated all packages using YUM. The system is running as a VM inside CentOS 5.5 using KVM. SELinux is enforcing, using the targeted policy. Bugzilla is version 3.6.1 and was NOT installed using RPM or YUM.
Bugzilla was working OK on this machine until SELinux was upgraded last week from 3.7.19-28 to 3.7.19-33, and is still broken after testing 3.7.19-37 from the testing repo. With SELinux in enforcing mode, apache returns error 500 when I browse to the main bugzilla page. The apache error log shows this:-
Code: [Mon Jul 19 13:15:08 2010] [error] [client 192.168.40.1] (13)Permission denied: exec of '/var/www/html/bugzilla/index.cgi' failed Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, is recorded in /var/log/audit/audit.log, /var/log/messages or /var/log/secure.
I've got two routers, 10.0.0.0/23 and 192.168.2.0/24, which are joined by a Linux box with interfaces eth0 (10.0.0.2) and ra0 (192.168.2.2). I've got masquerading for ra0, and a route to 192.168.2.0/24 on 10.0.0.0's router. I CAN ping hosts on 192.168.2.0 from 10.0.0.0 just fine, but I CANNOT access web pages.Strangely, If I enable masquerading on eth0, and add a route to 192.168.2.0s router to 10.0.0.0, I can ping AND access web pages from 192.168.2.0Here is my current iptables
The problem is that yum is refusing to install gcc on a new SL6 install. As far as I can make out, a security update that I applied prior to my attempt to install gcc has caused problems. I did a new SL6 install (x86_86) a couple of weeks ago. This was a minimal installation, and I didn't install any dev tools, as I intended to install them later from yum. Since then, I've done very little; I installed a few packages (samba, xemacs, etc), and I let the system update itself. The update installed 'kernel', and updated 'kernel-firmware' [URL]. I now need to install the dev tools (g++, and so on), but I can't. I've tried this from gpk-application, and directly from yum. The complete yum output is below, but the basic error is:
I use iptables firewall (v1.4.1) installed on FC8. I'm trying to limit the inflow traffic for the port 1723 to certain MAC addresses. To experiment with the mac option, I've written the following iptables rule:
Quote:
iptables -A INPUT -m -mac --mac-source 10:08:08:08:08:10 -j ACCEPT
It didn't work. It gave me this error message:
Quote:
iptables v1.4.1: Couldn't load match `-mac':/usr/local/libexec/xtables/libipt_-mac.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Try `iptables -h' or 'iptables --help' for more information. Does that mean the mac module wasn't installed/enabled?
I have a folder in a Samba shared drive which I've done the following with (in Unix):
1. Changed owner to Administrator. 2. Changed group owner to Domain Users. 3. Granted 700 (drwx------) permissions 4. Connected to Windows server via remote desktop 5. Mapped the Samba network drive as administrator 6. Right clicked on the folder > properties > security tab > advanced, and added one person (let's call him Joe) who has rwx access on that folder and everything in it. (along with administrator) 7. Went back to check Unix permissions on the folder and found that they had changed from drwx to drwxrwx+. Same goes for everything inside it. 8. Checked the ACL.
Slipping some (non-root) user a piece of malignant code that he or she executes might be considered as one of the highest security breaches possible. (The only higher I can see is actually accessing the root user) What can an attacker effectively do when he/she gets a standard, (let's say a normal Ubuntu user) to execute code? Where would an attacker go from there? What would that piece of code do?
Let's say that the user is not stupid enough to be lured into entering the root/sudo password into a form/program she doesn't know. Only software from trusted sources is installed. The way I see it there is not really much one could do, is there?
Addition: I partially ask this because I am thinking of granting some people shell (non-root) access to my server. They should be able to have normal access to programs. I want them to be able to compile programs with gcc. So there will definitely be arbitrary code run in user-space...
I am unable to restore my iptables from iptables-save after upgrading Fedora. I cannot get iptables-restore to work, and I have resorted to entering rules manually using the GUI.
I am using Fedora on my desktop pc. I want to know how can i protact my PC from outside world. What firewall policy should i implement in iptables to keep it more secure.
i set up a dmz to have a internet web server and ftp server, and ssh only from local network, so i wrote a iptables script to load during boot :
[Code]...
The problem is that everything works fine ( i have the same rules for other services such as samba, nfs, mysql on another server) BUT ftp there is no way to make it work. not even locally.when i try to connect, i log in, but while listing the directory i get MLSD ... and it hangs like this for a moment, then i get error message "connection time out" , "impossible to list directory". if i turn off the iptables script no problem,ftp works fine.. but why all services work and ftp no?
how do i have to modify the rules? what is strange also is that if i set as OUTPUT policy "accept", the server seems to be offline."host unknown" error message. I was thinking the rule INPUT is fine cause at least i can login, but the dir list is not going out, so gotta modify output rules. or state?
I've started a new job and have inherited a couple of RHEL4 64-bit servers. The firewall on them is currently disabled. I'm struggling to get them up and running as iptables is not the most user-friendly application. This lead me to downloading and trying a GUI front-end: Guarddog. Great app! But it doesn't have the default behavior I'm looking for. Here is what I need:
Default behavior: Firewall should be wide open, allowing ALL ports/IP's/TCP/UDP in and out of the server. Blacklist: Oracle TCP port 1521 needs to be blocked in/out of the server.
This will help get us passed our company's security vulnerability scan. (We aren't able to patch/upgrade Oracle at this time because we'd lose vedor support with a legacy app). I will use these settings as a starting point, and then once I learn more and get more comfortable with iptables (or a GUI app) then I can fine tune things to make them more secure. As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) once I get a script I just copy it into /etc/rc.firewall and it will load when iptables starts.
