My ISP (Cox) is blocking port 80 and I would like to know if there is a way to open it again. I am to taking about 8080, 8000 or 81 I want to use 80 so I can host my website and every one can access it without the need to put [url]:[PORT] at the URL
View 2 Replies
I have the default to deny all. The only rule I have in there is:
Code:
To Action From
-- ------ ----
[code]....
So first off, it probably seems this question has been asked thousands of times before. but I did do a search, mostly archived posts that ended up being something other than a true ip blocking of the port. [URL]..
So my port 80 is truly blocked. Ive tried setting up the port forwarding on my router, Ive tried manually allowing all traffic on port 80 through ip tables. Ive even dabbled with setting up something like openDNS to see So far nothing, Im only available on my local network.
There has to be some way to do a redirect though. even something as simple as an htaccess file redirecting [URL].. xxxx (the space is there to avoid my url being interrupted by a smiley
I have Ubuntu Server (x64) installed on my box with Apache2 and Squid. For awahile port 80 (http) was fine, I could update packages and use wget. Then one random day port 80 became blocked for incoming traffic. I couldn't use apt-get and had to change to an ftp mirror to update. Also wget is not working.
View 3 Replies View RelatedIn order to connect to the internet when i am at work i have to use a proxy server; the problem is that this proxy also blocks port xxxxx which is used by a internet radio station. Is there any way to be able to listen to that radio station?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI'm having an issue with ufw and Synergy. I'm trying to run my Xubuntu 10.10 desktop as a server, and my Xubuntu 10.10 laptop as a client. I can do this just fine as long as I either: Have ufw enabled on my client but disabled on my server Have ufw disabled on both my client and my server I have no custom rules added to iptables on my client. On my server, however, I have tried the following rules:
$ ufw allow from 192.168.0.0/24 to any port 24800 $ ufw allow from 192.168.0.0/24
Neither of these configurations works. ufw on my server seems to block my client's requests regardless of having port 24800 fully open from any local connection, or just flat-out fully allowing any incoming local connection. I'm not sure why ufw seems to be ignoring the rules I'm creating, but as it stands right now, the only way I can connect the two is if I have ufw on my server disabled. And I have tried to ping the two machines; each machine can ping the other, even if ufw is running on both.
And I can ping the router, as well, from both machines. Any ideas on where to go from here to troubleshoot? I should probably also add that I am using the same configuration file that I do on vanilla Ubuntu (with updated host names, of course), and I have no problems in Ubuntu. This seems to be specific to ufw and my Xubuntu desktop. I can paste the code for my server's configuration file, if desired.
I have cloned an embedded system that runs Opensuse 11 x86 using dd. The embedded system uses a simple serial device, by writing to the relevant device file (/dev/ttyS2, usually). Curiously, when I write to the same serial device on the newly cloned system (which, incidentally, has almost identical hardware), thusly:
echo hello > /dev/ttyS2 the command blocks for up to a minute, before finally returning without making the hardware do anything. I can boot into Opensuse's rescue system on the clone and successfully do exactly the same thing, as I can when I boot the original's "identical" operating system. Why might this problem occur? What can I do about it?
I am currently having problems with my server. Its being DDOSed. I have a vps with Centos 64bit. The attack I want to block is udp flood. I was trying to do something like this: iptables -I INPUT -p udp --dport 123 -m limit --limit 40/s -j DROP but instead of blocking certain hosts it blocks the whole port and during the attack its unreachable. How to limit packets per host or any other way to protect from udp flood.
View 11 Replies View RelatedI am currently running Debian 6. I would like to know if there is a way and how i would go about blocking a certain IP range from connecting to my server within a certain port range. Say for example.
i want to block ip range 123.123.123.* from connecting to my server on the ports 33000 - 43000. But, i want to allow them to connect on any other port range, and i want to be able to allow connections from my server to the blocked ip range on those same ports. so, blocking incoming only on the above port range.
using iptables.
I am at a loss how to prevent Denial of Service attacks to port 25 and not block legitimate connections from 2 Barracuda 800(s) and block smart phones such as iPhones/Blackberrys/iPhones that use the server smtp.server.com for email.
Presently for port 25
RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 25 -j ACCEPT
The 2 Barracuda 800(s) make port 25 connections all the time, plus users with smart_phones have the incoming server type:
IMAP
pop.server.com
smtp.server.com
Is there a way to keep Denial of Service attacks from happening with iptables rules without causing blocking to the Barracuda(s) that make constant port 25 connections & smart phones that poll? I was thinking if I allowed the Barracuda(s) in these lines
-s (barracuda)24.xx.xx.xx -d (emailserver)24.00.xx.xx -p tcp -m tcp --dport 25 -m state --state NEW -j ACCEPT
Where the source would be the Barracuda going to the email server. It would be allowed, then I am left with how to allow other connections like Smart_Phones that connect via Port 25. I am thinking if I put rules in place doing connection counts in a minute it would result in errors connecting to the server and people would start complaining. Plus any limiting may result in blocking real traffic. Then would I need to allow the ISP range in the above example to accept port 25, I am still left with how to drop a flood/denial of service attack.
For system calls, is blocking or non-blocking default in C? Simple question, just am not seeing the answer super quickly.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI have a device that is working on modbus protocol andI have written a small program(with block TCP read method ) to read its registers via modbus protocol.my program is working very well but except those times that I unplug the Ethernet cable or turning off the modbus gateway during programs work.at this time my program stops on recv system call (if it reach this system call exacly when I unplug Ethernet cable or turning off the modbus gateway during programs work).I changed my source to work in nonblock TCP method, at this time with the same situation my program does not stop/block on recv system call but after pluging back the Ethernet cable or resuming the connectivity situation back it reads data incorrectly .this is my code:Quote:
#define DEBUG
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <string.h>
[code]...
I want to do a simple port redirect, i.e. whatever comes trough whatever interface on port AAAA will get redirected to port BBBBI thought that iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING --source 0/0 --destination 0/0 -p tcp --dport AAAA -j REDIRECT --to-ports BBBBhowever it doesn't work, e.g. nc -v -w2 -z localhost AAAA gives:
nc: connect to localhost port AAAA (tcp) failed: Connection refused
while
nc -v -w2 -z localhost BBBB
[code]....
I have a mail server i need it to send message via port 587 not port 25, i make some changes to my postfix server which i use and it is already successed making a telnet to 587 port like it :
[Code]....
My question is quite simple:What are type of applications where socket in blocking mode can be used ?
And where non-blocking mode to be used ??
TCP is blocking by default.
sudo ssh -L 750:192.168.123.103:873 username@192.168.123.103It does exactly what it's supposed to do, but how do i edit / remove this rule?Is there some config file where i can alter the forwarding? How does it get stored?Im using Ubuntu 10.10Server Edition (allthough i recon it would be pretty much the same across all versions
View 5 Replies View RelatedI'm not that great with mailservers, and just been thrown a curveball with a MS Exchange environment for which there is apparently no solution... yeah, right. But is there a workaround?
The problem is that the site mail (SMTP) needs to be sent via port 26 instead of the commonly used 25. Port 25 is mapped to a mailfilter, which apparently causes havoc with some of the mail, and the techs that have been on site trying to coax the Exchange server to co-operate have said that the only way would be to get rid of the filter.
The problem is that there are number of apps that are unable to have the outgoing port changed and so keep sending mail out on port 25.
I look after the Unix/Linux side of things at work, and I was wondering if there was an easy way to set up a Ubuntu box to receive mail on port 25 and just forward it to the MS box on port 26? So, in other words (and I hope this makes sense): monitor port 25, and forward whatever comes in on port 25 to the server on port 26. Simple portforwarding, or is it? What steps do I need to take?
When I use the following command:
ssh user@ssh_server -L 5500:localhost:5500 -p 22
everything works fine. I can log in, and local port forwarding is done. Otherwise when I use the command:
ssh user@ssh_server -R 5500:localhost:5500 -p 22
I get an error "remote port forwarding failed for listen port 5500". However when I try remote port forwarding in WinXP by use of putty there is no problem...
I want to set my ip as static and port forward it through a specific port can anyone help me with this im using ubuntu 10 with 64 bit OS
View 1 Replies View Relatedi want if a port (exp. 1001) have 20 connections that the next new connection forword to an other port (exp. 1002).
View 2 Replies View RelatedVERY new to linux, erm but I have an issue that needs solving!I recently moved to university, where their network blocks sftp port 22, this means that I cannot connect to my FTP server which is running a version of linux.Now I've got this ftp server connected to a seedbox and it was created using the following walk through..Code:I have written this guide for a friend, but I though it would be useful for others as well.
There are several guides floating around, but I found that most always cock up in some way. This one is tried and tested to work on Debian Etch (on an OVH rps, but should apply to most servers).If there is a new stable release of rtorrent/libtorrent then I will update this guide to show you how to update it (without reinstalling the whole server).
At the bottom there are also instructions to install ftp access & some network monitoring software.Basically, I would really like someone to be able to construct the commands on how to change the listen port for sftp connection on linux or add another port to the list that Linux would use so that I could put in through putty.
I tried to make "ssh tunneling", but failed and got this message.
Quote:
Administrator@windstory-PC /
$ ssh -R 7869:localhost:7869 windowsstudy@192.168.0.4
windowsstudy@192.168.0.4's password:
Warning: remote port forwarding failed for listen port 7869 Last login: Wed Jul 21 01:56:04 2010 from 192.168.0.2 -bash-3.2$
1. system environment
192.168.0.2 - windows 7 + copssh
192.168.0.4 - centos 5.4 x86 + openssh
2. Guide for setting "ssh tunneling"
[URL]
3. Added this to sshd.conf
Quote:
AllowTcpForwarding yes
4. "netstat -na|grep 7869" at 192.168.0.4
Quote:
[root:maestro:~]# netstat -na|grep 7869
tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:7869 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN
tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:7869 127.0.0.1:53539 ESTABLISHED
[code]....
5. result of "ssh -vvv -R 7869:localhost:7869 windowsstudy@192.168.0.4"
Quote:
debug3: authmethod_lookup password
debug3: remaining preferred: ,password
debug3: authmethod_is_enabled password
[code]....
6. I added 7869 for telnet service as follow;
Quote:
mytelnet 7869/tcp # My Telnet server
Is there any way to verify if packets being trafficked over a certain port are valid for the service you want to use this port for?
One obvious example that probably clarifies my question:
When I open port 443 (outgoing or incoming) for https/ssl traffic, I don't want this port to be used for say openvpn traffic.
Thus: when someone wants to surf to a website with https, it should be ok but if someone wants to connect to his home openvpn server over that same port, it should be blocked.
I'm trying to use iptables in order to forward all the incoming packets for port 5555 to port 5556 on the same server (192.168.2.101).
I wrote the following commands:
iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -i any -p tcp --dport 5555 -j DNAT --to 192.168.2.101:5556
iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp -m state --state NEW -d 192.168.2.101 --dport 5556 -j ACCEPT
I'm trying to set rxtxSerial to work so a Java app has access to a serial port (via SiLabs CP210x driver, port /dev/ttyUSB0). When I use update-alternatives --config java, there are 3 alternatives which provide `java'. I have tried openJDK and Sun. Both fail but with completely different messages.
[Code].....
In SuSE firewall0. I do have a openSuse 11.4 and multiple IP addresses on eth0 interface
I run (trying to/have to) multiple TOMCAT servers.
I am trying to have each tomcat instance listen to on separate IP address for example:
What i am trying to do is to redirect
a) tomcat 1 -
a) tomcat 2 -
And so on.
I know that it has to be possible.
I do have just eth0/
Is is it possible. Do I have to create "vittual interfaces"? eth0:1, .......... and do redirection ?
"Server" has got just single interface - just 1 ethernet calbe goes to that server. I am planning to have 10-15 tomcat's on that server (I have to unfortunatley) and each has to run on port 80
Is it possible to "grant" permissions to normal users to run app on port 80 - that would solve me lots of problems if impossible to redirect.
I tried to setcap 'cap_net_bind_service=+ep' /path/to/tomcat ...... but no luck
i am running ncat (netcat's new version from nmap) on centos . I am listening on different ports. My question is , is it possible that when a connection is received on a port say 123, i redirect this connection to a different port and use the 123 port again for listening connections. ncat has an option -k which u can add with -l , it will force fully listen on the port. It can accept multiple connections on a single port but i want that once a client connects on to 123 port, he is forwarded to some other port and no longer on 123.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI'm using a Debian servers, as router/firwall.. I've two ethernet interfaces into the server, one for wan and one for lan. The i use SNAT so my LAN clients can access the internet throgh the debian router. That is working... Now i want to be able to access servers on the LAN site from the WAN site, and i wanna use port address translation (PAT). I have a FTP server running on a lan server, so i'm trying to portward port 21.
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -i eth1 -d (WANIP) --dport 21 -j DNAT --to 192.168.1.2:21
When people try to access my FTP from the WAN site, they are redirected to the local FTP server, and they are promted for crendentials, but when the credentials are typed, and the local ftp server should answer the wan request, the connections dies.
The wan clients are being promted for credentials, so they are redirected to the local lan server, but after that the connections dies, so i think there is some kind of nat problem, when the local lan server is trying to respond to the wan request..
Here i my iptables script:
#flush table
iptables -F
#input regler
[code]....
I make an application on GNU/Linux which listening on a MULTICAST stream, so I open my unconnected socket, bind it on a MULTICAST address and a port, join the multicast group with the "setsockopt (IP_ADD_MEMBERSHIP)", then I receive datagram on my socket.
Now I've two different instances of the same application that run with their own MULTICAST address and port. And what I found strange is that, after a misconfiguration, I switch the ports, for example:
Emitting on 225.0.0.1/23451 and 225.0.0.2/23452
Receiving on 225.0.0.1/23452 and 225.0.0.2/23451
And my receiving part doesn't care about the MULTICAST address, it looks like the socket is listening on the port number only! I mean that the receiver [225.0.0.1/23452] take its datagrams from emitter [225.0.0.2/23452] and vice-versa!
I'll explain this in one sentence: Is it possible to program a port-binding shellcode in which people across the Internet can connect to, without being thwarted by the router blocking their data because the port its bound to doesn't allow port-forwarding
View 2 Replies View Related
