Search Results

Search found 4538 results on 182 pages for 'rules'.

Page 136/182 | < Previous Page | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >

  • IP tables blocking access to most hosts but some accesses being logged

    - by epo
    What am I getting wrong? A while back I locked down my web hosting service while hardening it or at least trying to. Apache listens on port 80 only and I set up iptables using the following: IPS="list of IPs" iptables --new-chain webtest # Accept all established connections iptables -A INPUT --protocol tcp --dport 80 --jump webtest iptables -A INPUT --match state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED --jump ACCEPT iptables -A webtest --match state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED --jump ACCEPT for ip in $IPS; do iptables -A webtest --match state --state NEW --source $ip --jump ACCEPT done iptables -A webtest --jump DROP However looking at my apache logs I notice various log entries in access_log, e.g. 221.192.199.35 - - [16/May/2010:13:04:31 +0100] "GET http://www.wantsfly.com/prx2.php?hash=926DE27C156B40E55E4CFC8F005053E2D81E6D688AF0 HTTP/1.0" 404 206 "-" "Mozilla/ 4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)" 201.228.144.124 - - [16/May/2010:11:54:16 +0100] "GET /w00tw00t.at.ISC.SANS.DFind:) HTTP/1.1" 400 226 "-" "-" 207.46.195.224 - - [16/May/2010:04:06:48 +0100] "GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 200 311 "-" "msnbot/2.0b (+http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm)" How are these slipping through? I don't mind the indexing bots (though I am a little surprised to see them get through). I suppose they must be getting through using the ESTABLISHED,RELATED rules. And no, I can't for the life of me remember why the first match state rule is there So 2 questions: is there a better way to set up iptables to restrict access to specified hosts? How exactly are these 3 examples slipping through?

    Read the article

  • The Story of secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry if the story is boring and messy, but most of it is real! =) /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry for this boring and messy story! /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • Bandwidth monitoring with iptables for non-router machine

    - by user1591276
    I came across this tutorial here that describes how to monitor bandwidth using iptables. I wanted to adapt it for a non-router machine, so I want to know how much data is going in/coming out and not passing through. Here are the rules I added: iptables -N ETH0_IN iptables -N ETH0_OUT iptables -I INPUT -i eth0 -j ETH0_IN iptables -I OUTPUT -o eth0 -j ETH0_OUT And here is a sample of the output: user@host:/tmp$ sudo iptables -x -vL -n Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 1549 packets, 225723 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 199 54168 ETH0_IN all -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 1417 packets, 178128 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 201 19597 ETH0_OUT all -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain ETH0_IN (1 references) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain ETH0_OUT (1 references) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination As seen above, there are no packet and byte values for ETH0_IN and ETH0_OUT, which is not the same result in the tutorial I referenced. Is there a mistake that I made somewhere? Thanks for your time.

    Read the article

  • Router intermittently failing

    - by nomen
    My old Asus router died a few weeks ago, so I thought I'd set up my Debian box to deal with routing my home network. I have a few complications, but I adapted my configuration from a previously working configuration, and I don't see why I am having intermittent problems. But I am having them! Every so often, my SSH connections to the router (and to the Xen virtual machines hosted by the router) just drop. I am unable to use the router's dns server. I can't ping the router. Etc. All of these things work most of the time, but break down intermittently, for a few minutes at a time. (I can provide more details, but I'm not sure what will be helpful) /etc/network/interfaces: # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # Gigabit ethernet, internal network auto eth0 allow-hotplug eth0 iface eth0 inet manual # USB ethernet, internet auto eth1 allow-hotplug eth1 iface eth1 inet dhcp # Xen Bridge auto xlan0 iface xlan0 inet static bridge_ports eth0 address 10.47.94.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 As I understand it, this is sufficient to create the network interfaces, and even do some switching between Xen hosts and my eth0 interface. I installed and configured Shorewall to manage routing between the bridge and my internet-facing interface: /etc/shorewall/zones fw firewall net ipv4 lan ipv4 /etc/shorewall/interfaces net eth1 detect dhcp,tcpflags,nosmurfs,routefilter,logmartians lan xlan0 detect dhcp,tcpflags,nosmurfs,routefilter,logmartians,routeback,bridge /etc/shorewall/policy net all DROP info fw net ACCEPT info all all REJECT info /etc/shorewall/rules DNS(ACCEPT) fw net DNS(ACCEPT) lan fw Ping(ACCEPT) lan fw ... and so on, these all work, when the router is accepting traffic at all. /etc/shorewall/masq eth1 10.47.94.0/24 Also, the router is currently "working", and I checked on a problematic client: arp infrastructure infrastructure.mydomain (10.47.94.1) at 0:23:54:bb:7d:ce on en0 ifscope [ethernet] I tried it when the router was down, and I (eventually) got the same response. It took about 30 seconds to return, though.

    Read the article

  • Creating a test database with copied data *and* its own data

    - by Jordan Reiter
    I'd like to create a test database that each day is refreshed with data from the production database. BUT, I'd like to be able to create records in the test database and retain them rather than having them be overwritten. I'm wondering if there is a simple straightforward way to do this. Both databases run on the same server, so apparently that rules out replication? For clarification, here is what I would like to happen: Test database is created with production data I create some test records that I want to keep running on the test server (basically so I can have example records that I can play with) Next day, the database is completely refreshed, but the records I created that day are retained. Records that were untouched that day are replaced with records from the production database. The complication is if a record in the production database is deleted, I want it to be deleted on the test database too, so I do want to get rid of records in the test database that no longer exist in the production database, unless those records were created within the test database. Seems like the only way to do this would be to have some sort of table storing metadata about the records being created? So for example, something like this: CREATE TABLE MetaDataRecords ( id integer not null primary key auto_increment, tablename varchar(100), action char(1), pk varchar(100) ); DELETE FROM testdb.users WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT * from proddb.users WHERE proddb.users.id=testdb.users.id) AND NOT EXISTS (SELECT * from testdb.MetaDataRecords WHERE testdb.MetaDataRecords.pk=testdb.users.pk AND testdb.MetaDataRecords.action='C' AND testdb.MetaDataRecords.tablename='users' );

    Read the article

  • Slow upload, fast download on Windows 7 64bit system

    - by Malik
    I've got a weird problem in the download speeds on my desktop PC (Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit) are consistently fast (approx. 400kB/s) but uploads are very slow (around 6-10kB/s). This has been going on for the last 3 weeks or so. I am a very competent user and troubleshooter, and have searched online for 2 weeks for a solution, to no avail. Part of the problem is that internet is provided by WiFi by my landlord and I have no access to the router (BT Home Hub router) although I know for sure he wouldn't have the first idea on how to restrict my usage :) (rules that out) Anyway, I've tried: - various drivers (my Wifi 'card' is TP-link TL-WN851N, and I've tried TP-link + Atheros + Qualcomm Atheross drivers, suggested by Microsoft) - various tweaks to network parameters (e.g. as suggested by SpeedOptimser) - various tweaks to Windows 7 services (e.g. disabling/manual-ing unecessary services) - raising and lowering head onto a reasonably firm surface at moderate frequency (jk :D) None of the above have helped, and I'm officialy asking for help now!! Thanks for your time and effort in advance!

    Read the article

  • Why not block ICMP?

    - by Agvorth
    I think I almost have my iptables setup complete on my CentOS 5.3 system. Here is my script... # Establish a clean slate iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -F # Flush all rules iptables -X # Delete all chains # Disable routing. Drop packets if they reach the end of the chain. iptables -P FORWARD DROP # Drop all packets with a bad state iptables -A INPUT -m state --state INVALID -j DROP # Accept any packets that have something to do with ones we've sent on outbound iptables -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Accept any packets coming or going on localhost (this can be very important) iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT # Accept ICMP iptables -A INPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT # Allow ssh iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT # Allow httpd iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT # Allow SSL iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Block all other traffic iptables -A INPUT -j DROP For context, this machine is a Virtual Private Server Web app host. In a previous question, Lee B said that I should "lock down ICMP a bit more." Why not just block it altogether? What would happen if I did that (what bad thing would happen)? If I need to not block ICMP, how could I go about locking it down more?

    Read the article

  • MacBook Pro with OSX 10.6.3 (Snow Leopard) Wi-Fi network connection breaks after few minutes

    - by Yanick Landry
    I have a MacBook Pro with OSX 10.6.3 (Snow Leopard). After connecting on a Wi-Fi network, the connection "breaks" after a few minutes. What I mean by "breaking" is that all requests, whether it is loading a web page, connecting to a share folder, connecting to my local router at 192.168.0.1, or pinging anything doesn't get through (time out). When in a "break" situation, I can see in the Network Settings panel that I still have an active IP, which I can successfully ping. I have this problem at home with a router D-Link DI-624 and at work with a D-Link WBR-2310, all with updated firmwares. I thought DHCP was the issue. So I tried assigning a fixed IP address (192.168.0.166). It successfully connects, but after a few minutes, the connection still breaks. The solution I'm currently using is that I disable the AirPort (on the Network icon menu in the top bar), wait a few seconds then re-enable it. It then quickly works, but the connection still breaks after a few minutes. I tried Googling my problem but I think I can't find any good keywords ! It's my first question here, so sorry if I don't respect some rules.

    Read the article

  • nginx codeigniter rewrite: Controller name conflicts with directory

    - by palerdot
    I'm trying out nginx and porting my existing apache configuration to nginx. I have managed to reroute the codeigniter url's successfully, but I'm having a problem with one particular controller whose name coincides with a directory in site root. I managed to make my codeigniter url's work as it did in Apache except that, I have a particular url say http://localhost/hello which coincides with a hello directory in site root. Apache had no problem with this. But nginx routes to this directory instead of the controller. My reroute structure is as follows http://host_name/incoming_url => http://host_name/index.php/incoming_url All the codeigniter files are in site root. My nginx configuration (relevant parts) location / { # First attempt to serve request as file, then # as directory, then fall back to index.html index index.php index.html index.htm; try_files $uri $uri/ /index.php/$request_uri; #apache rewrite rule conversion if (!-e $request_filename){ rewrite ^(.*)/?$ /index.php?/$1 last; } # Uncomment to enable naxsi on this location # include /etc/nginx/naxsi.rules } location ~ \.php.*$ { fastcgi_split_path_info ^(.+\.php)(/.+)$; # NOTE: You should have "cgi.fix_pathinfo = 0;" in php.ini # With php5-cgi alone: fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; # With php5-fpm: #fastcgi_pass unix:/var/run/php5-fpm.sock; fastcgi_index index.php; include fastcgi_params; } I'm new to nginx and I need help in figuring out this directory conflict with the Controller name. I figured this configuration from various sources in the web, and any better way of writing my configuration is greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 Server can't connect to FTP

    - by stivlo
    I have Windows 2008 Server R2, and I am trying to install FTP services. My problem is I can't connect from outside, FileZilla complains with: Error: Connection timed out Error: Could not connect to server Here is what I did. With the Server Manager, I've installed the Roles FTP Server, FTP Service and FTP Extensibility. In Internet Information Services version 7.5, I've chosen Add FTP Site, enabled Basic Authentication, Allow a user to connect Read and Write. In FTP Firewall support on the main server, just after start page, I've set Data Channel Port Range to 49100-49250 and set the external IP Address as the one I see from outside. If I click on FTP IPv4 Address and Domain Restrictions, and click on Edit Feature Settings, I see that access for unspecified clients is set to Allow, so I click OK without changing those defaults. In FTP SSL Policy, I've set to Require SSL connection, certificate is self signed. I tried to connect with FileZilla from the same host and it works, however it doesn't work remotely, as I said above. I've enabled pfirewall.log, but apparently nothing gets logged. The server is in Amazon EC2, and on the security group inbound firewall rules, I've set that ports 21 and ports 49100-49250 accepts connections from everywhere. What else should I be checking to solve the problem?

    Read the article

  • Have servers behind OpenVPN subnet reach connecting clients

    - by imaginative
    I am trying to find some relevant documentation or what directives I need in either the OpenVPN server configuration or client configuration to accommodate for this use case. I have an OpenVPN server that clients connect to. The OpenVPN server can communicate directly with any of the clients already, this is not an issue. The client is able to reach any machine on the private subnet where OpenVPN resides, this is also not an issue. My issue is that the reverse is currently not possible - I have servers on the same subnet as the OpenVPN box that cannot reach any of the connecting clients. I'd like to be able to SSH to them and more, the same way the client can reach the servers behind the OpenVPN subnet. What do I need to do to make this possible? I already have masquerading rules set on the OpenVPN box: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.50.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE IP Forwarding is enabled: echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward I added a route on the server behind the private subnet to be aware of the route: 192.168.50.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Coloring of collapsed threads in mutt

    - by Rich
    I'm trying to figure out the syntax of colouring collapsed threads in the mutt index. The documentation for mutt patterns doesn't seem to include a description of how this works, and so far I've been completely unable to figure it out by trial and error. What I'd like is for collapsed threads that contain any unread (new) messages to be always coloured green. If collapsed threads with no unread messages contain any flagged messages, then I'd like them to be red. So far, every set of patterns I've tried results in threads that contain both flagged and unread messages being coloured red (I want them green). These work: color index green default "~N" # unread messages color index green default "~N~F" # unread flagged messages color index red default "~F" # flagged messages color index green default "~v~(~N)" # collapsed thread with unread But these don't: color index green default "~v~(~N~F)" # attempt to keep threads with unread green color index red default "~v~(~F)" # colours collapsed threads with flagged and unread red color index red default "~v~(!~N~F)" # ditto color index red default "~v~(^!~N~F)" # ditto color index red default "~v~(~F)~(!~N)" # ditto color index red default "~v~(~F)~v~(!~N)" # ditto I've also tried switching the order of the "~v~(~F)" and "~v~(~N)" commands in the file, but the "flagged" rule always seems to take precedence over the "new" rule. Ideally I'd like to understand how the syntax for colouring collapsed threads works, but at this point I'd happily settle for a set of rules that achieves the colourscheme described above.

    Read the article

  • default domain and first domain in apache2 causing trouble

    - by acidzombie24
    I have 3 sites and a default/test site using mono's test page. I created aFirst, c, d, e, zLast. zLast has rewrite rules that should be evaluated last. Since the first VirtualHost seen is the default i set it to this --aFirst-- <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName www.domain.tld ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost DocumentRoot /var/www/test DirectoryIndex index.html index.aspx index.php MonoDocumentRootDir "/var/www/test" MonoServerPath rootsite "/usr/local/bin/mod-mono-server2" MonoApplications rootsite "/:/var/www/test" <Directory /var/www/test> MonoSetServerAlias rootsite SetHandler mono AddHandler mod_mono .aspx .ascx .asax .ashx .config .cs .asmx </Directory> </VirtualHost> The problem is my default page (the ip address of my server) and the first website (csite.ddomain.net) have problems (even though csite is defined in c and is not the first virtual host). The ip address of my server and csite.ddomain.net ALWAYS load the same site. Either monos test page or the csite. It flips every time i restart apache. Why isnt the server ip address always loading the default page (mono test page) and why isnt csite.ddomain.net always loading the site i want!?! Heres the config for --csite-- <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName csite.testdomain.net ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost ServerAlias s.csite.testdomain.net DocumentRoot /var/www/prjname DirectoryIndex index.html index.aspx MonoDocumentRootDir "/var/www/prjname" MonoServerPath rootsite "/usr/local/bin/mod-mono-server2" MonoApplications rootsite "/:/var/www/prjname" <Directory /var/www/prjname> MonoSetServerAlias rootsite SetHandler mono AddHandler mod_mono .aspx .ascx .asax .ashx .config .cs .asmx </Directory> </VirtualHost> aFirst, c, d, e, zLast are all enabled.

    Read the article

  • iptables : how to allow incoming ftp traffic?

    - by logansama
    Hi, Still fighting my way through the jungle that is called iptables. I have managed to allow FTP access outside of our LAN: both these would work. NOTE: eth0 is the LAN interface and eth1 is the WAN interface. iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 20:21 -j ACCEPT or iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -p tcp --sport 20:21 --dport 1024:65535 -j ACCEPT But when i connect to a external FTP server i manage to log in and all is fine until it wishes to List the directory content. Then nothing happens as the data is blocked, due to the fact that i do not have a rule set up to allow it! (my last rule on the FORWARD chain is to block all traffic) I have tried a gazillion rules (many of which i did not understand) to try and allow the FTP traffic back through my server. One such rule for example was: iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 20:21 --dport 1024:65535 -j ACCEPT But i cannot get the List to work. It just times out after a while. Would anyone perhaps know how to build a rule which would allow FTP to List / allow such traffic back? Or have a link to sources i could work through? Thank you,

    Read the article

  • Xen virtual host can reach some sites but not others

    - by Tun H S Lee
    Okay, this is killing me. Debian Squeeze, Xen 4.0, brand new install. No iptables rules whatsoever except for the ones added by the default xen bridge script. Dom0 can reach the entire world, no problems. DomU can receive packets from some hosts, but not from others. For instance, if I ping Host A, it works fine. If I ping Host B, the DomU reports 100% packet loss. The hosts are random, but consistent (even after reboots). I can see no pattern to why some work and others don't. In fact, in some cases, different virtual hosts on the same server (an other server at a different data center) are divided; some work and others do not. I can reboot (DomU or Dom0 too) and the same hosts will work or fail as before. If I tcpdump on the Host B while pinging from the DomU, everything looks fine. It sees the echo request coming in and says it's sending one back. However, if I tcpdump peth0 on the Dom0, it never sees the echo reply. Any ideas what could be happening? I'm tearing my hair out here.

    Read the article

  • Apache: getting proxy, rewrite, and SSL to play nice

    - by Rich M
    Hi, I'm having loads of trouble trying to integrate proxy, rewrite, and SSL altogether in Apache 2. A brief history, my application runs on port 8080 and before adding SSL, I used proxy to strip the 8080 from the url's to and from the server. So instead of www.example.com:8080/myapp, the client app accessed everything via www.example.com/myapp Here was the conf the accomplished this: ProxyRequests Off <Proxy */myapp> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> ProxyPass /myapp http://www.example.com:8080/myapp ProxyPassReverse /myapp http://www.example.com:8080/myapp What I'm trying to do now is force all requests to myapp to be HTTPS, and then have those SSL requests follow the same proxy rules that strip out the port number as my application used to. Simply changing the ports 8080 to 8443 in the ProxyPass lines does not accomplish this. Unfortunately I'm not an expert in Apache, and my skills of trial and error are already reaching the end of the line. RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTPS} off RewriteRule myapp/* https://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} ProxyRequests Off <Proxy */myapp> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> SSLProxyEngine on ProxyPass /myapp https://www.example.com:8443/mloyalty ProxyPassReverse /myapp https://www.example.com:8433/mloyalty As this stands, a request to anything on the server other than /myapp load fine with http. If I make a browser http request to /mypp it then redirects to https:// www.example.com:8443/myapp , which is not the desired behavior. Links within the application then resolve to https:// www.example.com/myapp/linkedPage , which is desirable. Browser requests (http and https) to anything one level beyond just /myapp ie. /myapp/mycontext resolve to https:// www.example.com/myapp/mycontext without the port. I'm not sure what other information there is for me to give, but I think my goals should be clear.

    Read the article

  • IPTABLES syntax help to forward Remote Desktop requests to a VM [CentOS host]

    - by NVRAM
    I've a VM running MSWindows XP hosted on my CentOS 5.4 machine. I can rdesktop into it from the hosting machine and work just fine using the private ddress (192.168.122.65), but I now need to allow Remote Desktop access from other computers (not just the machine hosting the VM). [Edit] I only need to allow access for a day or so, so don't want to add a NIC (for XP activation reasons). Could someone help me with the iptables syntax? The VM is on a private/virtual network: 192.168.122.65 and my CentOS machine is on a physical network, at 10.1.3.38 (and 192.168.122.1 as the GW for the virtual net). I found this question, but none of the answers seemed to work and I'm a bit timid at blindly trying variations. My FORWARD rules are as listed. Thanks in advance. # iptables -L FORWARD Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- anywhere 192.168.122.0/24 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED ACCEPT all -- 192.168.122.0/24 anywhere ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-port-unreachable REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-port-unreachable RH-Firewall-1-INPUT all -- anywhere anywhere [Edit] If I do play "blindly" is there a simple way to reset the settings on CentOS (a la service network restart)?

    Read the article

  • What to do with old laptop screens?

    - by Lord Torgamus
    This question is inspired by another SU question I came across earlier today: What to do with old hard drives? It made me think about two long-dead laptops I have with perfectly good screens still inside. One is a Dell Inspiron 5100 and the other is an Averatec E1200, but responses need not be geared towards those particular models' screens. Rules, based heavily on the original question's: Objectives and suggestions to keep in mind when you post an answer : Should showcase your geekiness, be plain ol' fun, serve a social purpose or benefit the community. Your answer need not be limited to only one screen. For a really good answer, I'll go out and buy additional leftover screens. Your answer need not be limited to one project per screen. If additional accessories need be purchased, make sure they are common. Don't tell me to get a moon rock or something. The projects you suggested should serve a useful purpose; art is nice, but functional art is way better. Thanks in advance, folks. EDIT: Found another related question. Fun projects to do with an old 17" LCD monitor EDIT 2: I, for one, am enjoying the new outpouring of creativity here. Best fifty bucks... I mean, rep points... I ever spent. EDIT 3: That does it. At the end of the week, there was a tie for most votes between the accepted answer and the game platform answer. The game platform answer was cooler, but less reasonable as a project to actually do; in other words, it was more moon rocky. Unfortunately, I think fencepost had the best comment on the topic, which is that displays on their own have no good interface. Thanks for playing, everyone!

    Read the article

  • Linux iptables / conntrack performance issue

    - by tim
    I have a test-setup in the lab with 4 machines: 2 old P4 machines (t1, t2) 1 Xeon 5420 DP 2.5 GHz 8 GB RAM (t3) Intel e1000 1 Xeon 5420 DP 2.5 GHz 8 GB RAM (t4) Intel e1000 to test linux firewall performance since we got bitten by a number of syn-flood attacks in the last months. All machines run Ubuntu 12.04 64bit. t1, t2, t3 are interconnected through an 1GB/s switch, t4 is connected to t3 via an extra interface. So t3 simulates the firewall, t4 is the target, t1,t2 play the attackers generating a packetstorm thorugh (192.168.4.199 is t4): hping3 -I eth1 --rand-source --syn --flood 192.168.4.199 -p 80 t4 drops all incoming packets to avoid confusion with gateways, performance issues of t4 etc. I watch the packet stats in iptraf. I have configured the firewall (t3) as follows: stock 3.2.0-31-generic #50-Ubuntu SMP kernel rhash_entries=33554432 as kernel parameter sysctl as follows: net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 net.ipv4.route.gc_elasticity = 2 net.ipv4.route.gc_timeout = 1 net.ipv4.route.gc_interval = 5 net.ipv4.route.gc_min_interval_ms = 500 net.ipv4.route.gc_thresh = 2000000 net.ipv4.route.max_size = 20000000 (I have tweaked a lot to keep t3 running when t1+t2 are sending as many packets as possible). The result of this efforts are somewhat odd: t1+t2 manage to send each about 200k packets/s. t4 in the best case sees aroung 200k in total so half of the packets are lost. t3 is nearly unusable on console though packets are flowing through it (high numbers of soft-irqs) the route cache garbage collector is no way near to being predictable and in the default setting overwhelmed by very few packets/s (<50k packets/s) activating stateful iptables rules makes the packet rate arriving on t4 drop to around 100k packets/s, efectively losing more than 75% of the packets And this - here is my main concern - with two old P4 machines sending as many packets as they can - which means nearly everyone on the net should be capable of this. So here goes my question: Did I overlook some importand point in the config or in my test setup? Are there any alternatives for building firewall system especially on smp systems?

    Read the article

  • RESOLVED Why does IPtables's NAT stop working when I enable the firewall's third interface?

    - by Kronick
    On my firewall I've three interfaces : eth0 : public IP (46.X.X.X.) eth0:0 public IP (46.X.X.Y.) eth1 : public IP (88.X.X.X.) eth2 : private LAN (172.X.X.X) I've setup a basic NAT which works great until I turn on the eth1 interface, I basically loose the connectivity. When I turn off the interface (ifconfig eth1 down) then the NAT re-work. I've added some policy routing via iproute, which makes my three public IP's available. I don't understand why turning on eth1 on makes the LAN unavailable. PS : weirder ; when I turn on eth1 BUT remove the NAT, then the firewall is accessible by using the public IPS. So to me it's exclusively a NAT issue, since without the NAT the network works while with the NAT without the second public interface, the NAT does work. Regards EDIT : I've been able to make it work by using iproute2 rules. That was definitely a routing issue. Here is what I did : ip rule add prio 50 table main ip rule add prio 201 from ip1/netmask table 201 ip rule add prio 202 from ip2/netmask table 202 ip route add default via gateway1 dev interface1 src ip1 proto static table 201 ip route append prohibit default table 201 metric 1 proto static ip route add default via gateway2 dev interface2 src ip2 proto static table 202 ip route append prohibit default table 202 metric 1 proto static # mutipath ip rule add prio 221 table 221 ip route add default table 221 proto static \ nexthop via gateway1 dev interface1 weight 2\ nexthop via gateway2 dev interface2 weight 3

    Read the article

  • iptables rule on INPUT between 2 ethernet cards on the same host

    - by user1495181
    I have 2 eth cards on the same host. Both connected directly with LAN cable. I set eth0 with ip - 192.168.1.2 I set eth1 with ip - 192.168.1.1 I set this rule: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -j NFQUEUE --queue-num 0 There are no other rules. (I ran iptables -X,-F) I send TCP syn packet ( with c++ program by using raw socket) from 192.168.1.2 to 192.168.1.1 In wireshark i see that the packet received on eth0, but the iptables rule (above) dosnt apply for this packet. when i sent the packet to remote host and apply this rule on the remote host than it work correct. So, i guess that this is due to the fact that both eth cards exists the same host. . I need to create iptables INPUT rule for local eth card (dest and src on the same machine ). I need it for simplify test. Did i guess the problem correct? is there a way to bypass this? Ps - connected them via switch didn't help. the rule wasn't applied. Run on Ubuntu. TCDUMP show the packet: 10:48:42.365002 IP 192.168.1.2.38550 > 192.168.1.1.34298: Flags [S], seq 0, win 5840, length 0 but logging of iptables like this, has nothing: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -j LOG --log-prefix '*****************' iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -j LOG --log-prefix '#################'

    Read the article

  • Basic IPTables setup for OpenVPN/HTTP/HTTPS server

    - by Afronautica
    I'm trying to get a basic IPTables setup on my server which will allow HTTP/SSH access, as well as enable the use of the server as an OpenVPN tunnel. The following is my current rule setup - the problem is OpenVPN queries (port 1194) seemed to be getting dropped as a result of this ruleset. Pinging a website while logged into the VPN results in teh response: Request timeout for icmp_seq 1 92 bytes from 10.8.0.1: Destination Port Unreachable When I clear the IPTable rules pinging from the VPN works fine. Any ideas? iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 1194 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --dport 1194 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i ! lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 22 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -j REJECT iptables -A FORWARD -j REJECT

    Read the article

  • Libvirt/KVM in NAT: can't access from host (and can't forward)

    - by SharkWipf
    I'm trying to set up a port forward to a KVM guest, managed through Libvirt on Debian 6. The VM is running in NAT, through the "default" network. This all runs fine, the VM has full internet connection. However, the host cannot reach the vm internally. Neither ping, nc nor nmap on the NAT network give any signs of the VM. Due to this, the normal iptables forwarding rules don't work either. $ cat /etc/debian_version 6.0.5 $ libvirtd --version libvirtd (libvirt) 0.9.11.3 $ kvm --version QEMU emulator version 1.0 (qemu-kvm-1.0+dfsg-11, Debian), Copyright (c) 2003-2008 Fabrice Bellard ifconfig: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 54:04:a6:f1:6f:10 inet addr:x.x.x.x Bcast:x.x.x.x Mask:255.255.255.x inet6 addr: fe80::5604:a6ff:fef1:6f10/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:118902 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:142357 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:13247173 (12.6 MiB) TX bytes:95163190 (90.7 MiB) Interrupt:28 Base address:0xe000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:230646 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:230646 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:204577107 (195.0 MiB) TX bytes:204577107 (195.0 MiB) virbr0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr fe:54:00:e2:d2:60 inet addr:192.168.122.1 Bcast:192.168.122.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:5050 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:961 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:666759 (651.1 KiB) TX bytes:400701 (391.3 KiB) vnet0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr fe:54:00:e2:d2:60 inet6 addr: fe80::fc54:ff:fee2:d260/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:5050 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:125687 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:500 RX bytes:739803 (722.4 KiB) TX bytes:6886609 (6.5 MiB)

    Read the article

  • IP Masquerade and forwarding

    - by poelinca
    Hi all , i got a dedicated server running ubuntu server 10.10 with 3 ip adresses on the same eth card ( example: eth0 192.168.0.1 , eth0:0 188.78.45.0 , eth0:1 ... ) with a 3 virtual machines running ( virtualization technologi used is lxc but i don't think this matters too much ) . Now i need to redirect all ports opened ( using ufw to close/open ports ) from the ip 188.78.54.0 ( eth0:0 ) to a virtual machine ip ( let's say for example 192.168.2.3 ) , all requests made by a virtual machine should be redirected back to the virtual machine that made the request ( in this example 192.168.2.3 ) . Lets say the second vm has the ip 192.168.2.4 now i need to redirect all opened ports to from eth0:1 to this ip and viceversa . And so on and so on , what are the iptables/ufw rules to get this done ? and where to save them ( witch config file ) so they stay the same after reboot . In a few words redirect all requests comming from/to eth0:0 to a certan ip , all requests comming from/to eth0:1 to another ip ... Remember i'm saying all ports opened becouse they might be dynamicly changed . p.s. please excuse my bad english

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >