Search Results

Search found 952 results on 39 pages for '443'.

Page 27/39 | < Previous Page | 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34  | Next Page >

  • Ubuntu Pound Reverse Proxy Load Balancing Based off active server load?

    - by Andrew
    I have Pound installed on a loadbalancer. It seems to work okay, except that it randomly assigns the backend server to forward the request to. I've put 1 backend machine under so much load that it went into using swap, and I can't even ssh into it to test this scenareo. I would like the loadbalancer to realize that the machine is overloaded, and send it to a different backend machine. However it doesn't. I've read the man page and it seems like the directive "DynScale 1" is what would monitor this, but it still redirects to the overloaded server. I've also put in "HAport 22" to the backend figuring since I can't ssh in, neither could the loadbalancer and it would consider the backend server dead until it gets rid of the load and responds, but that didn't help either. If anyone could help with this, I'd appreciate it. My current config is below. ###################################################################### ## global options: User "www-data" Group "www-data" #RootJail "/chroot/pound" ## Logging: (goes to syslog by default) ## 0 no logging ## 1 normal ## 2 extended ## 3 Apache-style (common log format) LogLevel 3 ## check backend every X secs: Alive 5 DynScale 1 Client 1200 TimeOut 1500 # poundctl control socket Control "/var/run/pound/poundctl.socket" ###################################################################### ## listen, redirect and ... to: ## redirect all requests on port 80 to SSL ListenHTTP Address 192.168.1.XX Port 80 Service Redirect "https://xxx.com/" End End ListenHTTPS Address 192.168.1.XX Port 443 Cert "/files/www.xxx.com.pem" Service BackEnd Address 192.168.1.1 Port 80 HAport 22 End BackEnd Address 192.168.1.2 Port 80 HAport 22 End End End

    Read the article

  • (Zywall USG 300) NAT bypassed when accessing in-house-server From LAN Via domain name

    - by mschr
    My situations is like this; i host a number of websites from within our joint network solution. On the network is basically 3 categories: the known public, registered via mac, given static dhcp lease the anonymous lan connections, given lease from specific dhcp range switches, unix hosts firewall Now, consider following hosts which are of interest 111.111.111.111 (Zywall USG 300 WAN) 192.168.1.1 (ZyWall USG 300 LAN) load balances and bw monitors plus handles NAT 192.168.1.2 (Linux www) serves mydomain1.tld and mydomain2.tld 192.168.123.123 (Random LAN client) accesses mydomain1.tld from LAN 23.234.12.253 (Random External client) accesses mydomain1.tld via WAN DNS A records are setup so that both mydomain1.tld and mydomain2.tld points to 111.111.111.111 - and the Linux www serves the http parts with VirtualHost configurations, setting up the document roots pr ServerName, this is not so interesting though.. NAT rule translates 111.111.111.111:80 to 192.168.1.2:80 (1:1 NAT) Our problem follows; When accessing http://mydomain1.tld from outside (23.234.12.253 example host) the joint network - everything is fine, zywall receives requests via port 80 and maps it to the linux host' httpd. However - once trying to go through the NAT from LAN side (in-house, 192.168.123.123 example host) then one gets filtered in the Zywall port 80 firewall. I know this only because port 443 is open for administration interface and https://mydomain1.tld prompts for zywall login. So my conclusion is, that the LAN that accesses 111.111.111.111 in fact are routed to 192.168.1.1 whilst bypassing the NAT table. I need to know how to setup NAT / Policy Route, so that LAN WAN LAN will function with proper network translations instead of doing the 'quick nameserver lookup' or whatever this might be.

    Read the article

  • InstantSSL's certificate no different than a self signed certificate under Nginx with an IP accessed address

    - by Absolute0
    I ordered an ssl certificate from InstantSSL and got the following pair of files: my_ip.ca-bundle, my_ip.crt I also previously generated my own key and crt files using openssl. I concatenated all the crt files: cat my_previously_generted.crt my_ip.ca_bundle my_ip.crt chained.crt And configured nginx as follows: server { ... listen 443; ssl on; ssl_certificate /home/dmsf/csr/chained.crt; ssl_certificate_key /home/dmsf/csr/csr.nopass.key; ... } I don't have a domain name as per the clients request. When I open the browser with https://my_ip chrome gives me this error: The site's security certificate is not trusted! You attempted to reach my_ip, but the server presented a certificate issued by an entity that is not trusted by your computer's operating system. This may mean that the server has generated its own security credentials, which Google Chrome cannot rely on for identity information, or an attacker may be trying to intercept your communications. You should not proceed, especially if you have never seen this warning before for this site.

    Read the article

  • Connection refused in ssh tunnel to apache forward proxy setup

    - by arkascha
    I am trying to setup a private forward proxy in a small server. I mean to use it during a conference to tunnel my internet access through an ssh tunnel to the proxy server. So I created a virtual host inside apache-2.2 running the proxy, the proxy_http and the proxy_connect module. I use this configuration: <VirtualHost localhost:8080> ServerAdmin xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ServerName yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/proxy-error_log CustomLog /var/log/apache2/proxy-access_log combined <IfModule mod_proxy.c> ProxyRequests On <Proxy *> # deny access to all IP addresses except localhost Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from 127.0.0.1 </Proxy> # The following is my preference. Your mileage may vary. ProxyVia Block ## allow SSL proxy AllowCONNECT 443 </IfModule> </VirtualHost> After restarting apache I create a tunnel from client to server: #> ssh -L8080:localhost:8080 <server address> and try to access the internet through that tunnel: #> links -http-proxy localhost:8080 http://www.linux.org I would expect to see the requested page. Instead a get a "connection refused" error. In the shell holding open the ssh tunnel I get this: channel 3: open failed: connect failed: Connection refused Anyone got an idea why this connection is refused ?

    Read the article

  • SSH freeze when UFW is enabled

    - by Cristian Vrabie
    I have a small Ubuntu 10.10 server and i recently noticed a weird behavior (not sure if it was happening before). If I have ufw enabled (with default deny all in, allow all out, allow all http, allow all on a random port i use for ssh) when i perform some actions in a ssh sesion, the ssh console completely freezes. The server continues to work and if i close the console i can start another ssh session. This happens no matter from where I log in (tried from another ubuntu and a mac). The actions are fairly reproducible, for example vim some config files (though vim-ing other files works), cat some other file, etc. The freeze never happens if ufw is disabled. Any idea what's going on? Thanks! Cristian Addition: if you're wondering, yes, I have TcpKeepAlive on yes and I doubt is related (it would happen with ufw disabled too) As requested: my ufw conf below. Also, i don't know if it has something to do but the server has 2 ips. On one is configured the ssh domain, and on one to serve hhtp (via apache2) Status: active Logging: on (low) Default: deny (incoming), allow (outgoing) New profiles: skip To Action From -- ------ ---- 19922/tcp ALLOW IN Anywhere 9418/tcp ALLOW IN Anywhere 80/tcp ALLOW IN Anywhere 443/tcp ALLOW IN Anywhere

    Read the article

  • with nginx having the base url rewrite to https

    - by jchysk
    I'd like only my base domain www.domain.com to be rewritten to https://www.domain.com By default in my https block I have it reroute to http:// if it's not ~uri = "/" (base domain) or static content. server { listen 443; set $ssltoggle 2; if ($uri ~ ^/(img|js|css|static)/) { set $ssltoggle 1; } if ($uri = '/') { set $ssltoggle 1; } if ($ssltoggle != 1) { rewrite ^(.*)$ http://$server_name$1 permanent; } } So in my http block I need to do the rewrite if it has to https: server { listen 80; if ($uri = '/') { set $ssltoggle 1; } if ($ssltoggle = 1) { rewrite ^(.*)$ https://$server_name$1 permanent; } } If I don't have the $uri = '/' if-statement in the http block, then https works fine if I go directly to it, but I won't get redirected if I go to regular http which is expected. If I do put that in-statement in the http block then everything stops working within minutes. It might work for a few requests, but will always stop within a minute or so. In browsers I just get a blank page for all requests. If I restart nginx it continues to not work until I remove both if-statement blocks in both the https and http blocks and restart nginx. When I look in the error logs I don't see anything logged. When I look in the access log I see this message: "-" 400 0 "-" "-" which I assume means a 400 error. I don't understand why this doesn't work for me. My end goal is to have the base domain be https-only while all other pages default to http. How can I achieve this?

    Read the article

  • port forwarding with socks over proxy

    - by Oz123
    I am trying to browse a wiki that runs on a server inside one domain from another domain. The wiki is accessible only on the LAN, but I need to browse it from another LAN to which I connect with an SSH tunnel ... Here is my setup and the steps I did so far: ~.ssh/confing on wikihost: Host gateway User kisteuser Port 443 Hostname gateway.companydomain.com ProxyCommand /home/myuser/bin/ssh-https-tunnel %h %p # ssh-https-tunnel: # http://ttcplinux.sourceforge.net/tools/stunnel Protocol 2 IdentityFile ~/.ssh/key_dsa LocalForward 11069 localhost:11069 Host server1 User kisteuser Hostname localhost Port 11069 LocalForward 8022 server1:22 LocalForward 17001 server1:7100 LocalForward 8080 www-proxy:3128 RemoteForward 11069 localhost:22 from wikihost myuser@wikihost: ssh -XC -t gateway.companydomain.com ssh -L11069:localhost:22 server1 on another terminal: ssh gateway.companydomain.com Now, on my companydomain I would like to start firefox and browse the wiki on wikihost. I did: [email protected] ~ $ ssh gateway Have a lot of fun... kisteuser@gateway ~ $ ssh -D 8383 localhost user@localhost's password: user@wikiserver:~> My .ssh/config on that side looks like that: host server1 localforward 11069 localhost:11069 host localhost user myuser port 11069 host wikiserver forwardagent yes user myuser port 11069 hostname localhost Now, I started firefox on the server called gateway, and edited the proxy settings to use SOCKSv5, specifying that the proxy should be gateway and use the port 8383... kisteuser@gateway ~ $ LANG=C firefox -P --no-remote And, now I get the following error popping in the Terminal of wikiserver: myuser@wikiserver:~> channel 3: open failed: connect failed: Connection refused channel 3: open failed: connect failed: Connection refused channel 3: open failed: connect failed: Connection refused Confused? Me too ... Please help me understand how to properly build the tunnels and browse the wiki over SOCKS protocol. update: I managed to browse the wiki on wikiserver with the following changes: host wikiserver forwardagent yes user myuser port 11069 hostname localhost localforward 8339 localhost:8443 Now when I ssh gateway I launch Firefox and go to localhost:8339 and I hit the start page of the wiki, which is served on Port 8443. Now I ask myself is SOCKS really needed? Can someone elaborate on that ?

    Read the article

  • Can I use a single SSLCertificateFile for all my VirtualHosts instead of creating one of it for each VirtualHost?

    - by user65567
    I have many Apache VirtualHosts for each of which I use a dedicated SSLCertificateFile. This is an configuration example of a VirtualHost: <VirtualHost *:443> ServerName subdomain.domain.localhost DocumentRoot "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/users/public" RackEnv development <Directory "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/users/publ`enter code here`ic"> Order allow,deny Allow from all </Directory> # SSL Configuration SSLEngine on #Self Signed certificates SSLCertificateFile /private/etc/apache2/ssl/server.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile /private/etc/apache2/ssl/server.key SSLCertificateChainFile /private/etc/apache2/ssl/ca.crt </VirtualHost> Since I am maintaining more Ruby on Rails applications using Passenger Preference Pane, this is a part of the apache2 httpd.conf file: <IfModule passenger_module> NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName _default_ </VirtualHost> Include /private/etc/apache2/passenger_pane_vhosts/*.conf </IfModule> Can I use a single SSLCertificateFile for all my VirtualHosts (I have heard of wildcards) instead of creating one of it for each VirtualHost? If so, how can I change the files listed above?

    Read the article

  • smbclient timing out

    - by Sam Lee
    I am trying to set up a Samba share on a Centos machine. I want to connect to this server using smbclient on OS X. Here is what happens: > smbclient -L X.X.X.X timeout connecting to X.X.X.X:445 timeout connecting to X.X.X.X:139 Error connecting to X.X.X.X (Operation already in progress) Connection to X.X.X.X failed What could be going wrong? Here is my iptables dump on the Centos machine (the server): > iptables -L -n Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 REJECT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 127.0.0.0/8 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:445 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:3000 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:443 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:22 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 8 REJECT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:3000 And finally, my smb.conf: [global] workgroup = workgroup security = SHARE load printers = No default service = global path = /home available = No encrypt passwords = yes [share] writeable = yes admin users = myusername path = /home/myhome/ force user = root valid users = myusername public = yes available = yes

    Read the article

  • iptables-restore: line 1 failed

    - by Doug
    Hello, I am new to servers, and I was following this guide and it failed on the first command instructed. Could anyone give me a hand? http://wiki.debian.org/iptables ~ZORO~:/etc# iptables-restore < /etc/iptables.test.rules iptables-restore: line 1 failed Edit: iptables.test.rules ~ZORO~:/etc# cat /etc/iptables.test.rules *filter # Allows all loopback (lo0) traffic and drop all traffic to 127/8 that doesn't use lo0 -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i ! lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT # Accepts all established inbound connections -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allows all outbound traffic # You could modify this to only allow certain traffic -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # Allows HTTP and HTTPS connections from anywhere (the normal ports for websites) -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Allows SSH connections for script kiddies # THE -dport NUMBER IS THE SAME ONE YOU SET UP IN THE SSHD_CONFIG FILE -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 30000 -j ACCEPT # Now you should read up on iptables rules and consider whether ssh access # for everyone is really desired. Most likely you will only allow access from certain IPs. # Allow ping -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT # log iptables denied calls (access via 'dmesg' command) -A INPUT -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "iptables denied: " --log-level 7 # Reject all other inbound - default deny unless explicitly allowed policy: -A INPUT -j REJECT -A FORWARD -j REJECT COMMIT

    Read the article

  • IIS SSL is taking all IPs although it is told not to

    - by Martin Sall
    I have a testing system where IIS Express on Windows 7 SSL website has to live together with Cerberus FTP server SSL website (Cerberus FTP has a built-in web server for HTTP uploads). I have set up Windows to use two IPs from my router 192.168.1.128 (for IIS SSL Web Site, using a self-generated SSL certificate for now) 192.168.1.129 (for Cerberus FTP built-in SSL Web Site) In IIS I have set web site binding to use only the IP 192.168.1.128. But still when I launch Cerberus, it says - cannot bind 192.168.1.129:443. I tested in Firefox - indeed, when I go to 192.168.1.129 (or even localhost), I do not get “Unable to connect“ page as expected, but “The connection was reset” instead. IIS is still occupying those IPs, although it is not serving the website on those IPs. When I stop the IIS website, Cerberus FTP Website launches without problems. But then I cannot launch IIS web site, it tells - "The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process". Why is IIS SSL web site still occupying all IPs?

    Read the article

  • HTTPS and Certification for dummies

    - by Poxy
    I had never used https on a site and now want to try it. I did some research, but not sure that I understood everything. Answers and corrections are greatly appreciated. Here we go: To use https I need to generate ‘private’ and ‘public’ keys for the web server I use. In my case it’s apache (manual: http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/ssl/ssl_faq.html) Https protocol should be bind to port 443. Q: How to do it? Is it done by default? Where can I check configuration? Aplying https. Q: If I see https in browser does it mean that the data traffic on the page IS encrypted? Any form on the page would submit data via https? Though all the data gonna be encrypted, the browsers would still show ugly red messages. This is just because they do not know anything about my certificate. They have about a hundred certificates pre-installed but mine is not one of them, obviously. But the data IS encrypted by https. If I want browsers to recognize my certificate, I would need to have it signed by one of the certification authorities (ca) that has its certificate pre-installed (e.g. thawte, geotrust, rapidssl etc). UPD: To reed about ssl/tsl: The First Few Milliseconds of an HTTPS Connection, I found it very informative. Examples for PHP (openssl.org) of how to make use of ssl/tsl on the server side are published here.

    Read the article

  • Apache stops responding to http requests -- https continues to work

    - by Apropos
    Okay. Very strange problem that I'm having here. I just recently updated to Apache 2.4.2 from 2.2.17, mostly to try to get name-based SSL VirtualHosts working (although they should have been working on 2.2.17). Server is Win2008 R2 (so x64 by definition) running with PHP 5.4.3 and MySQL 5.1.40 (outdated, I know). When I launch the server, it initially works fine. Responds to all requests, VirtualHosts all in order. However, after an uncertain amount of time (appears to only take a few minutes for the most part, but sometimes takes hours), it stops responding to regular HTTP requests (on any VirtualHost). HTTPS continues to work. No errors in the log, and nothing in the access logs when I attempt to connect. I'm having a hard time finding the source of this error given its intermittent nature. When removing all SSL-based VirtualHosts, it seemingly increased stability (still responding to HTTP requests twelve hours later). This could be mere coincidence, though. Entirety of SSL VirtualHost is as follows, should there happen to be a problem with it. <VirtualHost *:443> DocumentRoot "C:\Server\www\virtualhosts\mysite.net" ErrorLog logs/ssl.mysite.net-error_log CustomLog logs/ssl.mysite.net-access_log common env=!dontlog SSLEngine on SSLProtocol all -SSLv2 SSLCipherSuite ALL:!ADH:!EXPORT:!SSLv2:RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM SSLCertificateFile C:/Server/bin/apache/apache2.4.2/conf/ssl/server.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile C:/Server/bin/apache/apache2.4.2/conf/ssl/server.key SSLCertificateChainFile C:/Server/bin/apache/Apache2.4.2/conf/ssl/sub.class1.server.ca.pem SSLCACertificateFile C:/Server/bin/apache/Apache2.4.2/conf/ssl/ca.pem </VirtualHost> Any ideas what I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • Which is more secure: Tomcat standalone or Tomcat behind Apache?

    - by NoozNooz42
    This question is not about performance, nor about load-balancing, etc. Which would be more secure: running Tomcat in standalone mode or running Tomcat behind apache? The thing is, Tomcat is written in Java and hence it is pretty much immune to buffer overrun/overflow (unless a buffer overrun in a C-written lib used by Tomcat can be triggered, but they're rare [the last I remember was in zlib, many many moons ago] and one heck of a hack to actually exploit), which gets rid of a lot of potential exploits. This page: http://wiki.apache.org/tomcat/FAQ/Security has this to say: There have been no public cases of damage done to a company, organization, or individual due to a Tomcat security issue... there have been only theoretical vulnerabilities found. All of those were addressed even though there were no documented cases of actual exploitation of these vulnerabilities. This, combined with the fact that buffer overrun/overflow are pretty much non-existent in Java, makes me believe that Tomcat in standalone mode is pretty secure. In addition to that, I can install both Java and Tomcat on Linux without needing to be root. The only moment I need to be root is to set up a transparent port 8080 to port 80 forwarding (and 8443 to 443). Two iptables line as root, that's all root is needed for. (I don't know for Apache). Apache is much more used than Tomcat and definitely does not have a security track record as good as Tomcat. What would make Tomcat + Apache more secure? What would make Tomcat + Apache less secure? In short: which is more secure, Tomcat standalone or Tomcat with Apache? (remembering that performance aren't an issue here)

    Read the article

  • VirtualBox VM running web server not accessible via external IP

    - by mwigdahl
    I have a Windows 7 machine running VirtualBox with an Ubuntu guest. The guest has a Bitnami LAMP stack installed. I have the guest configured for Bridged networking, and I can access the guest web server just fine from other machines on my LAN using the guest's IP. I'm trying to configure port forwarding so that I can access the web server from outside my LAN. (The router is a 2WIRE model as I'm on ATT's UVerse). I've set up port forwarding for ports 80 and 443 to the guest's IP in a similar manner to how I had them set up for my previous, physical web server, which worked just fine. However, I cannot seem to access the new, virtual web server using my external IP on the forwarded port. I suspected Windows Firewall issues on the host, but disabling it didn't solve the issue. Anyone have advice on what I should try next? EDIT: I've now attempted disabling the firewall on the guest with sudo ufw disable -- that doesn't seem to help either. However, after checking the router's port forwarding in more detail I may see the problem. My VM is named "linux" and in the router's configuration pages it shows up inconsistently. Sometimes it reports with a valid LAN IP and other times it doesn't show up with any IP. Even when it shows the correct IP the router indicates that it is disconnected. Could this be an indication that the 2WIRE router doesn't play well with VirtualBox's bridged networking mode?

    Read the article

  • WebDav System Error 67 in Windows XP

    - by Nixphoe
    Issue: I'm having issues getting WebDav to work in the command line on Windows XP, both Service Pack 2 and Service Pack 3. C:\>net use z: https://mywebsite.com/software/ System error 67 has occurred. The network name cannot be found. I have tested this with two webdav server. Both Ubuntu Apache and I Windows Server 2003 IIS. Both get the same result. Things That Haven't Worked: I've installed the following Microsoft KB on my XP machines with no avail. I've also found the following reg key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\WebClient\Parameters UseBasicAuth REG_DWORD 1 I try the following when trying to use a few work around I've dug up on the web, all producing the same result. net use z: https://mywebsite.com/software net use z: https://mywebsite.com/software# net use z: https://mywebsite.com/software/ net use z: https://mywebsite.com/software/# I've also tried all the above combinations adding a user into it /user:user and /user:user@domain. I've also tried using http:// rather than https://. I've tried "\\server.com@ssl:443\folder" I've gone over networking related issues as @WesleyDavid had pointed out. Things that do work: I can connect to the webdav folder via the URL and with mapping in Network Place, with XP. But the command line doesn't work (I need a drive letter). Windows 7 works perfectly with the same command. My Delemma: I need this to work with a drive letter. What else can I try to get this working?

    Read the article

  • IP-dependent local port-forwarding on Linux

    - by chronos
    I have configured my server's sshd to listen on a non-standard port 42. However, at work I am behind a firewall/proxy, which only allow outgoing connections to ports 21, 22, 80 and 443. Consequently, I cannot ssh to my server from work, which is bad. I do not want to return sshd to port 22. The idea is this: on my server, locally forward port 22 to port 42 if source IP is matching the external IP of my work's network. For clarity, let us assume that my server's IP is 169.1.1.1 (on eth1), and my work external IP is 169.250.250.250. For all IPs different from 169.250.250.250, my server should respond with an expected 'connection refused', as it does for a non-listening port. I'm very new to iptables. I have briefly looked through the long iptables manual and these related / relevant questions: http://serverfault.com/questions/57872/iptables-question-forwarding-port-x-to-an-ssh-port-of-different-machine-on-the-n http://serverfault.com/questions/140622/how-can-i-port-forward-with-iptables However, those questions deal with more complicated several-host scenarios, and it is not clear to me which tables and chains I should use for local port-forwarding, and if I should have 2 rules (for "question" and "answer" packets), or only 1 rule for "question" packets. So far I have only enabled forwarding via sysctl. I will start testing solutions tomorrow, and will appreciate pointers or maybe case-specific examples for implementing my simple scenario. Is the draft solution below correct? iptables -A INPUT [-m state] [-i eth1] --source 169.250.250.250 -p tcp --destination 169.1.1.1:42 --dport 22 --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT Should I use the mangle table instead of filter? And/or FORWARD chain instead of INPUT?

    Read the article

  • both ssl and non-ssl on single port

    - by Zulakis
    I would like to make my apache2 webserver serve both http and https on the same port. With the different method i tried it was either not working on http or on https.. How can I do this? Update: If I enable SSL and then visit the with http I get page like this: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>400 Bad Request</title> </head><body> <h1>Bad Request</h1> <p>Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.<br /> Reason: You're speaking plain HTTP to an SSL-enabled server port.<br /> Instead use the HTTPS scheme to access this URL, please.<br /> <blockquote>Hint: <a href="https://server/"><b>https://server/</b></a></blockquote></p> <hr> <address>Apache/2.2.9 (Debian) PHP/5.2.6-1+lenny16 with Suhosin-Patch mod_ssl/2.2.9 OpenSSL/0.9.8g Server at server Port 443</address> </body></html> Because of this, it seems very much possible to have both http and https on the same port. A first step would be to change this default-page so it would present a 301-Moved header. Update2: According to this, it is possible. Now, the question is just how to configure apache to do it.

    Read the article

  • Simple Linux program that takes any HTTP/HTTPS request and returns a single page?

    - by ultrasawblade
    I have a Linux box operating as router. There's a NIC that's connected to the internet (WAN), a NIC connected to an 8-port GbE switch (LAN), and a NIC connected to a Linksys wireless N-router (WLAN). Routing between everything is working perfectly. I have security completely disabled on the wireless router, but the WLAN NIC is firewalled such that it will only accept DNS queries and PPTP VPN connections. Currently HTTP/HTTPS traffic and everything else is blocked. I would like to run something that listens on port 80/443 of the WLAN NIC, and, for non VPN'ed connections, given any HTTP/HTTPS request it will return a single webpage saying "Unauthenticated" and explain how to sign into the VPN. A transparent proxy seems to be what I need, but my searches all seem to direct me to Squid, which is already running on my server and seems overkill for this simple task. Is there a simpler, lightweight program out there that does just this or should I just suck it up and run two instances of Squid (or figure out how to configure it)? Or, is this entire VPN thing I'm doing complete nonsense and I should just enable encryption on the wireless router?

    Read the article

  • Windows Firewall Software to Filter Transit Traffic

    - by soonts
    I need to test my networking code for Nintendo Wii under the conditions when some specific Internet server is not available. Wii is connected to my PC with crossover ethernet cable. PC has 2 NICs. PC is connected to hardware router with ethernet cable. The hardware router serves as NAT and has an internet connected to its uplink. I set the Wii to be in the same lan as PC by using Windows XP Network bridge. I can observe the WII network traffic using e.g. Wireshark sniffer. Is there a software firewall that can selectively filter out transit traffic? (e.g. block outgoing TCP connections to 123.45.67.89 to port 443) I tried Outpost Pro 2009 and Comodo. Outpost firewall blocks all transit traffic with it's implicit "block transit packet" rule. If the transit traffic is explicitly allowed by creating the system-wide low level rule, then it's allowed completely and no other filter can selectively block it. Comodo firewall only process rules when the packet has localhost's IP as either source or destination, allowing the rest of the traffic. Any ideas? Thanks in advance! P.S. Platform is Windows XP 32 bit, no other OSes is allowed, Windows ICS (Internet Connection Sharing) doesnt work since the Wii is unable to connect, becides I don't like the idea of adding one more level of NAT.

    Read the article

  • Sendmail doesn't work with iptables, even though smtp and dns are allowed

    - by tom
    I have sendmail installed on Ubuntu 10.04 solely for the use of the php mail() function. This works fine unless iptables is running (I've been using sendmail [email protected] to test this). I think that I have allowed SMTP and DNS (the script I am using to test iptables rules is below, in my version are the actual IPs of my hosts nameservers), but to no avail! iptables --flush iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Postgres iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 5432 -j ACCEPT # Webmin iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 10000 -j ACCEPT # Ping iptables -A INPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-reply -j ACCEPT # sendmail iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 25 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --sport 25 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # DNS iptables -A INPUT -p udp --sport 53 -s <nameserver1> -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p udp --sport 53 -s <nameserver2> -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --sport 53 -s <nameserver1> -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --sport 53 -s <nameserver2> -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 53 -d <nameserver1> -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 53 -d <nameserver2> -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 53 -d <nameserver1> -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 53 -d <nameserver2> -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -j DROP # Add loopback iptables -I INPUT 1 -i lo -j ACCEPT

    Read the article

  • Prevent nginx from redirecting traffic from https to http when used as a reverse proxy

    - by Chris Pratt
    Here's my abbreviated nginx vhost conf: upstream gunicorn { server 127.0.0.1:8080 fail_timeout=0; } server { listen 80; listen 443 ssl; server_name domain.com ~^.+\.domain\.com$; location / { try_files $uri @proxy; } location @proxy { proxy_pass_header Server; proxy_redirect off; proxy_set_header Host $http_host; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-Proto https; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Scheme $scheme; proxy_connect_timeout 10; proxy_read_timeout 120; proxy_pass http://gunicorn; } } The same server needs to serve both HTTP and HTTPS, however, when the upstream issues a redirect (for instance, after a form is processed), all HTTPS requests are redirected to HTTP. The only thing I have found that will correct this issue is changing proxy_redirect to the following: proxy_redirect http:// https://; That works wonderfully for requests coming from HTTPS, but if a redirect is issued over HTTP it also redirects that to HTTPS, which is a problem. Out of desperation, I tried: if ($scheme = 'https') { proxy_redirect http:// https://; } But nginx complains that proxy_redirect isn't allowed here. The only other option I can think of is to define the two servers separately and set proxy_redirect only on the SSL one, but then I would have duplicate the rest of the conf (there's a lot in the server directive that I omitted for simplicity sake). I know I could also use an include directive to factor out the redundancy, but I really want to keep just one conf file without any dependencies. So, first, is there something I'm missing that will negate the problem entirely? Or, second, if not, is there any other way (besides including an external file) to factor out the redundant config information so that I can separate out the HTTP and HTTPS versions of the server config?

    Read the article

  • Is this a solution for having multiple SSL certificates on the same IP

    - by Saif Bechan
    I am running CentOS running on a VPS. I read some guides on having multiple SSL certificates on the same system, but I can not get the basics to work. The guide I got that makes the most sense to me is the doing the following. In CentOS I can make virtual NIC's. So I made 2 virtual NIC's to start with. 192.168.10.1, 192.168.10.2. Now I work in ISP manager Pro, so this is listening on my primary ip 1.1.1.1 For each website I have them listening on 192.168.10.1:80, 192.168.10.1:443 In the hosts file I made the following 2 entries 192.168.10.1 1st.com 192.168.10.2 2nd.com Now the strange thing is that when I browser to 1st.com I do not get the website located at 192.168.10.1, I get the website located at my prim IP 1.1.1.1 Should I do something like forwarding or routing for this setup to work? And the basic question: Will this setup even work? Are the SSL certificates based on the IP adress, or are the based on the host name, 1st.com and 2nd.com.

    Read the article

  • How many reverse proxies (nginx, haproxy) is too many?

    - by Alysum
    I'm setting up a HA (high availability) cluster using nginx, haproxy & apache. I've been reading great things about nginx and haproxy. People tend to choose one or the other but I like both. Haproxy is more flexible for load balancing than nginx's simple round robin (even with the upstream-fair patch). But I'd like to keep nginx for redirecting non-https to https among other things right at the point of entry to the cluster. On the other hand, nginx is a lot faster for serving static contents and would reduce the load on the powerful apache which loves to eat a lot of RAM! Here is my planned setup: Load balancer: nginx listens on port 80/443 and proxy_forwards to haproxy on 8080 on the same server to load balance between the multiple nodes. Nodes: nginx on the node listens to requests coming from haproxy on 8080, if the content is static, serve it. But if it's a backend script (in my case PHP), proxy forward to apache2 on the same node server listenning on a different port number. Technically this setup works but my concerns are whether having the requests going through several proxies is going to slow down requests? Most of the requests will be PHP requests as the backends are services (which means groing from nginx - haproxy - nginx - apache). Thoughts? Cheers

    Read the article

  • SSL timeout on some sites, across all browsers, on Mac OS X Snow Leopard

    - by dansays
    For the past several weeks, I've been receiving "Error 7 (net::ERR_TIMED_OUT): The operation timed out" when I attempt to connect to either Twitter or Paypal via SSL. I get this specific error in Google Chrome, but the same problem occurs in both Safari and Firefox. Other sites work fine, and other computers on my network can access these two sites. I have no firewall settings that would prevent me from accessing these sites over port 443. I notice that both Twitter and Paypal both have "Verisign Class 3 Extended Validation SSL CA" certificates. It is unclear whether this is related to the problem. In an effort to troubleshoot, I attempted to open the test sites referenced on Verisign's root certificate support page, which worked fine. Just to be sure, I downloaded and installed the root package file and installed all included Verisign certificates. No joy. I feel like I've hit a dead end. Any ideas? Update the first: I also cannot connect to FedEx.com, who also has a Verisign Class 3 Extended Validation cert. Update the second: Aaaaaaand it fixed itself. I did nothing. Or, I did something that worked, but in a delayed fashion. Frustrating, but a win is a win. I'll take it.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34  | Next Page >