Networking :: Iptables Rules - Wireless Interface Got Ip From Another Server ?
Jun 18, 2010
The following is my setup. wireless server (ip of this server is 192.168.1.1) -- target board ( wireless client [ip of this is got for wireless server is 192.168.1.3 ] , bridge (192.168.36.1) )-- linux pc ( 192.168.36.3) as show above i have target board for that i have a wireless interface and a linux pc is connected to target board.now the ips are like this for linux pc 192.168.36.3 and my target board bridge ip s 192.168.36.1
my wireless interface got ip from another server like 192.168.1.3 ,now if i do ping on my target board for 192.168.1.1 it goes through wireless interface to the 192.168.1.1 wireless server.but when i do the same from target board connected linux pc its not pinging from linux pc i could able to ping to 192.168.1.3 but not 192.168.1.1 .I think i need to write a iptable rule properly on my target board to forward the 192.168.1.* packtes to wireless interface.
I have set up a master DNS server at 192.168.50.9 and a slave DNS at 192.168.50.6. Both servers are BIND9.Machines are for testing/experimenting, hence the IP addresses. Initially, the zone transfer was blocked by the firewall on the master, as the slave uses randomly selected non-privileged ports for zone-transfer query. So, as far as I understand, there are two possible approaches:
1. Allow connections based on source, which should be Code: -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -s 192.168.50.6 --sport 1024:65535 --dport 53 -j ACCEPT (and it works for me fine)
2. Allow ESTABLISHED and RELATED connections, which would be something like Code: -A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT which was my initial idea but didn't work, but has inspired me to dig deeper into firewall configuration topics :).
Question: Does zone change notification message count for opening a dialog, or notification from master and slave zone update request are two absolutely separate actions? If the latter is true, that, of course, explains why option #2 didn't work.
I have a set of iptables I have downloaded and modified for my use. I had it working for 1 lan and wan access. I now would like to have: wan access, 1 lan, and 1 wlan. I need to administer the entire network from my wireless laptop on the wlan network so I need to be able to access the lan from the wlan network, and have the wlan access the lan network. Here are my rules:
#!/bin/sh # IPTABLES FIREWALL script for the Linux 2.6 kernel. # This script is a derivitive of the script presented in # the IP Masquerade HOWTO page at: [URL] # It was simplified to coincide with the configuration of the sample system presented in the Guides section of [URL] # This script is presented as an example for testing only and should not be used on a production firewall ..... echo -e " Firewall server rule loading complete "
I added a few rules to my /etc/iptables.rules file and then used sudo iptables-restore < /etc/iptables.rules but i got an error saying "iptables-restore: line 29 failed".But the only word on that line.
I'm curious but recently I was troubleshooting some iptables rules to allow nfs clients access to my nfs server. What was strange was that I setup a tcpdump session on my nfs server so that I can see which ports were being requested. I ran several tcpdump sessions with the following filters in place.
tcpdump -vv src ip_of_client and dst _ip_of_client tcpdump -vv src hostname_of_client and dst hostname_of_client
However, the only packet I ever saw come over the wire to me was the client host asking for a arp resolution. Anyhow, I finally just ran 'rcpinfo -p' and added those ports to my iptables rules and it worked great. However, I would like to understand how nfs works in case I need to troubleshoot it in the future. I do understand that nfs uses portmappers, would this explain the behavior?
i have just setup a firewall using iptables on centos 5.3 but there's an issue with ftp i can connect and i can login when i give command "ls" it says entering passive mode and afterwards it times out do you know why? i have port 21 open in my firewall but still....
I need with some iptables rules. I've done all I can, Googling all over, to cover as many exploits as possible and the following script is what I've come up with. The current set up works and I've checked with NMAP. I just need some sort of confirmation that this is pretty much what I can do.
Code:
LAN="eth0 eth1" RANGE=10.1.0.0/17 WAN=eth2 # Delete all existing rules
[code]....
Also, if I wanted a broadcast to be relayed to all subnets within a defined range, how would such a iptables rule look like? I need this in order to find a networked Canon MP640 printer.
I just install 1 firewall using Iptables. Firewall includes 2 NIC: NIC1 <IP PUBLIC> NIC2 192.168.10.1 I installed 1 web server IP: 192.168.10.2 I have some PC IP range: 192.168.10.10->20
I set rules NAT on firewall and PC & web server can connect internet good, but I have problems: When PC access to web server with IP 192.168.10.2 that ok, but PC can't access to web server when using IP Public. But outside internet, I can access to web server using IP Public.
Rules on IPTables Code: # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Sun Mar 7 21:01:16 2010 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [950:126970] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [89:5880] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [19:1342] -A PREROUTING -d 209.99.242.124 -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.10.2:80 -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.10.0/24 -o eth0 -j SNAT --to-source 209.99.242.124 *filter :INPUT DROP [1599:157409] :FORWARD DROP [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [232:34452] -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -d 192.168.10.2 -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o eth1 -j ACCEPT COMMIT
We have setup a Exchange server at remote location and while testing I am facing following issue:
1. While configuring Outlook, it's not able to reach the exchange server which hosted at third party and is reachable from everywhere except my Local Network. My Local network is as following:
Local Lan On Private subnet - Gate+Firewall(Iptables) with two interfaces(private and pubic)with natting-Internet Connectivity.
Where as Exchange server is setup at a Data Center and accessible from internet.
I need to know that what all rules are required for user's to configure outlook with Exchange 2010.
Rest of the things are working fine (Internet connectivity, Exchange OWA access).
I have been trying for days now to get this to work. didn't want to bother people with my questions, i have installed Fail2Ban 0.8.4 on CentOS 5.4.
I get the email notifications from Fail2Ban stating that it just blocked another IP, however, when i look at the iptables through webmin, nothing is actually in there, also the log/secure file dose not show that the ip has been blocked.
Even when I try to log-in with the wrong password, after a few tries i get the email telling me that my ip is blocked, however, I can still SSH using my 'blocked' IP.
I am trying solve a strange problem which ocurred after upgrading many packages including kernel and iptables.This is a Fedora 10 PC acting as a small home-server I've been using over a year without problems. Recently, I've run a yum upgrade and after that, connections outside home wouldn't work. No changes in IPtables (firewall) rules have been done. But connection through local network is working.Symptom is.I've connected to my second PC at home and connected to the server. It works fine on local network. I restart network services (service network restart) and outside connections could be established.I have disabled iptables and ip6tables and after reboots it works fine. But PC is running without firewall.
I'm trying to configure NFS sharing behind a firewall, I got it to work and all but I was caught by something that (to me anyways) seems odd.I've been able to mount the export on another computer and am transferring files over as we speak, but I'm just interested in knowing why the RELATED,ESTABLISHED rule seems to be catching almost all the traffic coming from the other node. Any ideas? Should I be concerned that my firewall isn't protecting anything or something?
Whenever I add a rule to iptables, all of the policy counters reset. The counters for each individual rule remain intact, however, the main counter resets. Here's what I mean:
Code: [root] ~ # iptables -vL Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 65M packets, 83G bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 50M packets, 30G bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination .....
I'm trying to build a firewall with IPTables: INTERNET <--------> (eth0) FIREWALL (eth1) <------------->FTP_srvI set all rules DROP by default.My rules for forwarding packet to FTP server:
I two servers set up: 192.168.1.150 and 192.168.1.160 Initially, I want all traffic to be served by server 150. So for this purpose I am leaving the IPTables on .150 empty. At a point in time, I want to forward all incoming traffic to be served by .160 instead. I have accomplished this using these commands (on .150):
My problem is that if I have an open SSH connection to .150 (prior to adding the rules), the packets are still handled by .150 after adding the rules.. e.g. my SSH session stays active. I want these packets to be forwarded to .160, which would effectively disconnect the SSH session. I do not want the packets flat out dropped, I just want them forwarded on in whatever state they are in. If I try a new SSH session, it is properly forwarded to .160
I'm trying to configure Iptables and I just want to block everything but http/https. However, my connection is pppoe, so I have the ppp0 interface. Pretty much every Iptables tutorial that I found don't teach how to deal with this kind of setup. I'm forwarding the ppp0 to eth0 and I could configure the input rules and they're working. After this, I need to configure the output but nothing seems to work.
The current working rules are: Code: Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 7858 packets, 5792K bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 299 201K ACCEPT all -- any any anywhere anywhere state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- any any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:www 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- any any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:https 11 820 DROP all -- any any anywhere anywhere
Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 ACCEPT all -- eth0 ppp0 anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT all -- ppp0 eth0 anywhere anywhere state RELATED,ESTABLISHED Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 10791 packets, 1951K bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
I don't understand what those "state RELATED,ESTABLISHED" rules do. Also, I don't know if this rules are secure, because i'm very confused about the ppp0/eth0 interfaces.
Just installed Ubuntu 10.10 server and all working great except the wireless interface. The card is an edimax EW-7711ln. I installed ndiswrapper using the driver rt2860.zip found here [URL]. Then I followed this guide to configure /etc/network/interfaces [URL]. I think the driver is loading fine but I can't connect to the access point. Here is some debugging output...
Code: peter@Peter-Server~$: route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface Code: peter@Peter-Server~$: iwconfig .....
So I can scan and see the accesspoint with ssid alleycat but I can't connect. I tried disabling all security to see if it was a problem with my key or some encryption settings but even that didn't work. So frustrating because it seems close to working I must be doing something silly. Incase anyone is wondering why I am running a server off a wireless interface, its just a LAMP development server on my home network.
I've been having issues setting up the wireless interface on my Ubuntu server (command-line only, no GUI) and I can't seem to get it working. It seems as though the card is recognized, the drivers are installed and the interface is up, but it fails to connect. I have no idea where I'm going wrong. I have WPA and a MAC filtering setup on my wireless router. An exception has been made for this PC's MAC address and I've manually entered the connection details into /etc/network/interfaces.
I am establishing a VPN connection with a Cisco VPN server, but only want outgoing connections to a certain set of IP addresses to actually go through the VPN. I tried something like this:
Code: sudo iptables -A OUTPUT -t mangle -p tcp -d 111.222.0.0/16 -j ROUTE --oif tun0 but keep getting
it�s been several years since i played with iptables. I have setup like this:eth0 is the only physical device on box and eth0:0 is aliased. Traffic going out of the box to internet uses eth0eth0 116.55.58.1eth0:0 116.55.58.2I have a service listening on port 80 on 116.55.58.2Lets say my client connect to 116.55.58.2:80 through 116.55.58.1 , how do I force (mangle you name it) with iptables that the outgoing source address will be always 116.55.58.2?
I am trying to do something outlandish with iptables (or so I think!).I have a source sending udp packets to a destination (say dst11). Using port mirroring I am able to get all these packets to a different machine (say dst22). I am able to see these packets on dst22 interface using tcpdump.I want to analyze the packets on dst22. So what I do is put dst22 interface in promiscuous mode (using ifconfig eth0 promisc). This in theory should get the packet through the MAC layer. Now using iptables I am trying to DNAT the packets in nat prerouting to change the packets destination IP to dst22's interface and change the destination port.
My Ubuntu Box has 3 interfaces. eth0 (Internal 192.168.1.0/24)eth1 (External ISP DHCP)eth2 (External ISP Static IP)I need the outgoing traffic to internet for 1 of the internal pc (192.168.1.10) to only go only go through eth2
When I do...# iptables -L...I see rules in my INPUT and OUTPUT chains that look scary:ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere...but these rules only apply to the loopback interface. I tested it and the server cannot be reached on open ports from the outside world. How can I make iptables show the interfaces that the rules apply to?Otherwise, every time I do iptables -L it will scare the crap out of me.
I am trying to program iptable rules for implementing a 1:1 NAT which does the following:
1. Forward all traffic from all ports on a public ip to a private ip 2. Forward traffic from a range of ports (x-->y) on a public ip, to a private ip
I did some google searches for the same, and came up with the following.
iptables -A FORWARD -t filter -o eth0 -m state state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -t filter -i eth0 -m state state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
Can someone please let me know strong iptables rules? Below entries are in iptables file.Here Y.Y.Y.Y is another branch public IP.This server acts as gateway+squid server.Further it will serve company's intranet page also using httpd.OS is CentOS 5.0.
