I'm currently using a homemade Python script to parse script kiddie IP addresses from logfiles.To this point, I've simply been DROPping any requests from these IPs using iptables.I thought it might be fun to redirect their traffic back to them, but as I am not an expert at iptables, I was wondering if I should use FORWARD or PREROUTING.
View 7 Replieshow to redirect network traffic to a new IP address using IPtables. I am using Baffalo router and the rtos used is DD-WRT. Basically, I want it so that any connection going through my router to a specific IP (say, 192.168.11.5) will be redirected to another IP (say, 192.168.11.7) so any outgoing connections made by a program that is attempting to connect to192.168.11.5 will instead connect to 192.168.11.7.
View 2 Replies View RelatedWe host a web server in which we are hoping to implement some form of traffic redirection based on source IP address, and I am wondering whether the squid proxy built on iptables would be capable of managing this task? Essentially we are trying to redirect traffic from specific set of source IP ranges to a "Your IP has been restricted" type of page at a different IP/FQDN.
View 2 Replies View RelatedHow do I redirect all the UDP traffic on port 27016 of my current dedicated server to a new IP port 27015 using IP tables?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI set up iptables but it is blocking my SSH set up. I did allow it by opening port 22 but it did not work. Here is my config:
Code:
iptables -F
iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT
iptables -P INPUT DROP
iptables -P FORWARD DROP
### this should allow SSH traffic
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
How do you allow SSH through the iptables firewall?
I've a server, and I want to drop all the traffic going out with other source port than 80 (apache) and 22(ssh). The reason is I want to prevent my machine sending packets I don't know (i.e. my server scanning networks or making DDOS attacks without my knowledge). The problem are the updates. If I do what I've said, the updates will not work. I want to allow updates, so I need to let DNS traffic (port 53) and the traffic of the updates to go out.
The problem is the source port. This traffic uses a dynamic port (I think like HTTP). Is there any way to specify a source port to do this? If a have a static port to do this, I would drop all the traffic going out with other port than 22,53,80 and this port.
Now I managed to get iptables to work with my OpenVZ configurations and everything seems to work as it should. However when I run iptables -L I can only see source for the second SSH rule, why isn't the first ones source/IP shown? Also if you have any comments about the setup feel free. I'm running SSH, Apache and local MySQL
The xxx.xxx is simply to hide my IP's
Code:
iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT
iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT
iptables -P FORWARD DROP
iptables -F
iptables -F INPUT
iptables -F OUTPUT
iptables -F FORWARD
iptables -F -t mangle
iptables -X
iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -s 77.213.xxx.xxx -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -s 62.198.xxx.xxx -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -m state --state INVALID -j REJECT
iptables -A INPUT -j REJECT
iptables -A INPUT -j DROP
I'm simply trying to make a little restriction on www packets under two rules:
1. Allow inbound/outbound www packets (works!)
2. DROP inbound traffic to port 80 from source ports less than 1024. (DOES NOT WORK!)
Now, technically, when i use hping to test my rules, hping3 192.168.100.100 -S -p80 -s 1023 I should NOT receive any packets. However, i still receive packets, which means my rule that says less than 1024 does not work. (see below)
And this is my iptables rules in shell-script so far:
#!/bin/sh
DEFAULT_NIC=eth0
SERVER_IP="192.168.100.100"
ALLOWED_WWW_PORT=80
IPT="/sbin/iptables"
[Code].....
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 have "Server A" with real internet ip 1.2.3.4 (eth0) and lan ip 192.168.1.1 (eth1) There's also "Server B" with lan ip 192.168.1.2 (eth0), I'm running an Apache Web server on "Server B", so I want to redirect all traffic from IP 1.2.3.4 port 80 (Server A) to 192.168.1.2 port 80 (Server B), using the following rule:
[Code]....
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -d 1.2.3.4 --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 192.168.1.2:80 This actually works pretty good, from internet I can browse ttp://1.2.3.4 But the problem is that if I check the Apache logs, all incoming connections seems to come from 192.168.1.1 instead of showing the real source ip addresses (internet ip's) so this is screwing up all my web stats, I've been looking for hours and hours on how to make a transparent redirect, but can't find any info, I know there must be a way because my old WRT54G router which uses iptables could do it.
I was wondering what the best way of redirecting all traffic, not just http traffic, from my hosted web server on hostmonster (with a domain name) to my home server.... I wondered if it would be possible to do it with a simple script running on the hosted web server?? Also is there a way of getting round having all the ports open on the hosted web server that I want to use on my home server??
View 2 Replies View RelatedI was trying to find some free VPN service for access restricted pages. I found some working programs for win XP, but nothing works under Linux (TOR was too slow and now it is blocked). I was using program PacketiX under win, and it has also Linux version without GUI, but i was not able to make it work, because I dont know, how can I make firefox to connect through the VPN service.
I downloaded the client here [URL]
I was able to make it work with this guide [URL]
But i dont know, how to adjust routing table so I can connect to the internet through the VPN service.
ifconfig
Code:
ath0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:05:4e:4d:c5:5f
inet addr:192.168.1.100 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:576 Metric:1
[Code].....
I tried to setup a home server that will redirect the internet traffic through the server before it reach the client. Because i don't want to install anti virus on every machine, it will slow them down a lot. There are some anti virus for ubuntu. Most of my home machines are running windows, which is a pain with virus.
p/s: I'm running 1 ubuntu server 10.04 and the rest are windows 7 machines.
Currently I have a server which runs under centOS 5.6. It is dedicated to the VoIP application of my customer.I have a problem for which I have the solution but I didn't managed to achieve it.So, let me explain you the context.Here is the networking aspects of my environment
VoIP Provider_____Gateway_____________My server
ADSL Provider____(non pingable)
x.x.x.2 <====> A.A.A.1 <======> A.A.A.3
[code]....
I need to redirect all http/https/ftp traffic through the remote proxy, but when I changes connection settings in browser or in System->Preferences->Network Proxy it doesn't work well: instead of getting page content browser asks for saving some short (8 bytes) file with the same content for all requested pages. It happens in Chrome/Opera/Firefox. This proxy requires authorization and works on computer with Windos XP. It worked well when I was using Windows 7 and Proxifier, now I have Ubuntu 9.10 with all available updates.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have set up an openvpn server on ubuntu via port tcp 443. The server use a public network and almost every ports are blocked (not 443) So when a client connect to the server, if it send traffic needing a blocked port, the connection cannot been etablished of course. So i d like to know if it is possible to redirect all incoming traffic on the server to an other unblocked port (like 443) to bypass firewall.
I dont think openvpn offer this possibility but maybe with linux it is possible..
Have done a bit of Googling around this but got totally swamped so will try here. Basically we are running a CentOS server which hosts a number of virtual hosts under Apache. Recently I needed to set up a development environment for another site using Ubuntu and have this running and accessible on the LAN from a VMWare image. I'm using bridged networking so the VMWare machine has its own IP on the LAN subnet.
I've set up a DNS to point to the external IP of the physical host but can't figure out how to route traffic requested on this domain to the VMWare host. I've basically tried two approaches (configuring a proxy web server and reverse proxy in an httpd.conf file and mucking around with iptables forwarding rules but without success.
Ideally I'd like somesite.somewhere.com to point to the VMWare IP but I could live with a custom port on the end if thats whats required.
To throw further complication into the mix I need reliable communication between the VMWare machine and external mail relay servers in order to debug any issues with mail bouncebacks, embargos etc.
Any idea what's the easiest way to accomplish this?
I'd like to set up an iptables configuration as follows:- Allow all traffic by default- For one user account (anonymous), block all traffic except:- All traffic on lo- All DNS requests, which should be redirected to 127.0.0.1Here's what I tried:
# Redirect
iptables -A OUTPUT -p udp -m owner --uid-owner anonymous -m udp --dport 53 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 53
[code]....
I have a virtual environment, RHEL6 minimal install. On that, I am trying to run Liferay6 on Tomcat6 for the purpose of writing prototype business portals. I used the Liferay+Tomcat bundle downloaded from the Liferay website.
For security reasons, the server can only be accessed through port 80, and Tomcat listens on 8080. (I know I can run it so that it listens on another port, but I'd like it on 8080)
Goal:
Use iptables to forward traffic destined for 80 to port 8080.
What I Did:
Configure nat to forward tcp packets from 80 to 8080:
Code:
List the nat iptable:
Code:
wget to 80 doesn't work:
Code:
What I Already Checked:
Tomcat did start normally. Logs show no errors, and specify that Coyote HTTP/1.1 is initialized on http-8080. I can provide this log if need be.
Tomcat is listening on port 8080:
Code:
Code:
I get the same negative result on the VM on the server as I get on a RHEL6 VM on my laptop.
The iptables method that I described above does in fact work with Liferay6 on Tomcat6 on Ubuntu 10.10.
I have looked at this thread. I appear to have tried everything that was mentioned there.
Actual Question: I would like to know how to effectively forward 80 to 8080 on RHEL6, so that I can access Liferay on Tomcat (listening on 8080) at 80.
I'm trying to redirect the requests from port 80 to ports 8080 and 8081 through iptables because I've got two services which need accept requests from the same port(80):
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 80 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 8080-8081
The problem is that the second port (8081) never gets a request, just the first one.
i used the angry ip scan software and found alot of the public ip addresses on our network are accessable from outside when they are not suppose to, For eg printers/ pcs etc. to make a start on locking down the network i was wondering if anybody knew th iptables command to add a rule which blocked all incoming traffic to specific ip adresses on the network and to a range of ip addresses.
View 7 Replies View RelatedI've tried both the firewall interface that comes with Fedora and Firestarter, neither can configure as I want. So I think I'm going to have to do it by hand. In this laptop I have one 10/100 Nic and one wifi connection, at times either of them can be connected to the network. How can I configure IPtables so that any traffic is allowed out, nothing is allowed in (other than std stateful firewall replies), no icmp and that the fw logs any attempts to connect to the laptop?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI did some playing around changing up the configuration of my server and now cannot pass traffic through to port 22. I have since restored everything back to the way it was but am still not able to ssh into the server.
nmap only shows port 80 and 5222 open. Both ports that I want open. However I am unable to get 22 to pass.
iptables -nL shows
http://www.theprepared.com/images/tech/iptables_nL.PNG
netstat -an |grep 22 shows
http://www.theprepared.com/images/tech/netstat.PNG
I've tried clearing the routing table with the following which did no good.
ip route flush table main
Can somone point me in the right direction?
I do $ sudo iptables -A INPUT -p TCP -i eht0 --destination-port 80 -j ACCEPT
and then $ sudo ufw enable but I still get no internet traffic. What is wrong? Shouldn't opening port 80 to TCP allow the packets though my firewall?
I'm using Ubuntu server 9.10 with 2 NICS (Internet-router-eth0, eth1-LAN). I use iptables to generate rules for 20 computers, but when I execute the script, ALL TRAFFIC DROPS, including the server. What am I doing wrong?
Code:
#!/bin/sh
#eth0 192.168.0.50 - connected to Internet
#eth1 192.168.1.51 - connected to LAN
#192.168.1.52 - workstation1
#set default policies
iptables -P INPUT DROP
[Code]...
iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -s 192.168.1.52 -j ACCEPT. The reason I'm doing this is, I just want to open necessary ports in the server and restrict LAN usage.
I need to configure iptables to block incoming traffic (except specific ports), but allows all outgoing traffic.
I am able to block incoming traffic, but doing so also prevents outgoing traffic (tested by telnet [URL] 80)
The following was used:
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport ssh -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT
iptables -I INPUT 1 -i lo -j ACCEPT
iptables -A INPUT -j DROP
Also, even allowing NOT SYN requests still prevents outgoing traffic.
iptables -I INPUT 1 -p tcp ! --syn -j ACCEPT
Another point:
# modinfo ipt_state
modinfo: could not open /lib/modules/2.6.18-028stab070.14/modules.dep
How to install ipt_state module on ubuntu?
I'm looking to use Linux (Ubuntu 9.10) as a network bridge between two subnets. I can configure iptables to permit all traffic on eth0 (subnet 1) to pass to eth1 (subnet 2) but before transmitting that traffic I want to perform further analysis. Is it possible within iptables or via a third-party product such a pyroman, to write a "hook" that then directs that traffic to another application installed on the same host?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have an Untangle Box - which for those that don't know is a modified Debian Lenny used as a router, proxy, filter and much more - It has three physical interfaces on it eht0 (incoming traffic), eth1 (Outgoing to LAN after traffic filtered), and eth2 (Called a DMZ NIC, as Untangle can be used as a router). There is also a tun0 interface setup by Untangle for VPN (Not using the Openvpn in Untangle because I need bridged a bridged VPN and this is not an option in Untangles offering), a br0.eth setup by untangle to bridge eth0 and eth1 for traffic flow through as it is inline from router to switch and not acting as the router itself, and a br0 interface that I have setup by bridge script bridging eth2 and tap0 to run OpenVPN as a bridged VPN.
The routes on the machine are as follow:
Code:
untangle:~# route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.100.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br.eth0
192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br0
192.0.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 dummy0
192.0.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 utun
untangle:~#
I don't see a default route listed here, however, I do have Internet connectivity on the Untangle box itself. I also know that by script to bridge the tap0 and eth2 interfaces adds a default route through the gateway on the network that eth2 is connected to. So the lack of a default route is somewhat puzzling to me, I do have the gateway set through the web based admin interface Untangle offers.
The iptables rules are as follow:
Code:
untangle:~# iptables --list-rules
-P INPUT ACCEPT
-P FORWARD ACCEPT
-P OUTPUT ACCEPT
-N alpaca-firewall .....
There was an addition output rule in the alpaca-nat-firewall rule that said DROP outgoing interface eth2, I removed that rule with no change. I can ping out from the Untangle server to the eth2 LAN, I can access resources in the eth2 subnet. But I cannot get any reply from the server from anything either in that subnet or not. If I run iftop I can see the incoming traffic form my ping but the Server sends out no reply. I think this is a firewall issue. I can access the server by connecting to the IP assigned to the eth0/br0.eth interface which is in my main LAN. I am also attaching a crude diagram of the previous setup and the new setup (Previous setup used a different server for my bridged VPN).
Is there a rule I can add to ensure that traffic coming in on an interface goes out the same interface? Do I have a rule blocking incoming traffic to eth2/br0? Do I have one blocking sending out on eth2/br0? Do I have a default rule that is killing the traffic on eth2/br0 and I need to add an accept rule for traffic coming in on eth2/br0? I tried adding an accept rule for traffic coming in on br0, but it didn't work. I tried an output rule, but that didn't work, but I may have been bungling these rules as I do not fully understand the syntax and function and body of an iptables rule. The exact original iptables information before I modified anything can be viewed at [URL].
I need to set OUTPUT to DROP, and add the outgoing traffic one by one, but I couldn't do it. My current config is as follows:
Code:
*filter
:INPUT DROP [0:0]
:FORWARD DROP [0:0]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0]
:RH-Firewall-1-INPUT - [0:0]
-A INPUT -j RH-Firewall-1-INPUT
-A FORWARD -j RH-Firewall-1-INPUT
:RH-Firewall-1-OUTPUT - [0:0]
-A INPUT -j RH-Firewall-1-OUTPUT
#previously ESTABLISHED,RELATED comm is ok
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
#80 is ok from all
-A RH-Firewall-1-INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT
If I change OUTPUT to DROP in :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0], I don't get any response from a server running in that box. I am using RHEL 5.5. Now, asking Red Hat is not an option: I have the license but I don't have support license.
I am trying to configure iptables for only HTTP and HTTPS traffic. I start by blocking all traffic, which works, via:
Code:
iptables -F
iptables -P INPUT DROP
iptables -P FORWARD DROP
iptables -P OUTPUT DROP
I then try to allow HTTP and HTTPS on eth0 with these commands, which does not work:
Code:
iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 80 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
Code:
iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 443 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 443 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT After these commands I should be able to access the internet. Does anyone know why this is not working?