ter will allow public port 80 to route to internal
> port 8080 and will point to a specific internal pc, which has one network
> board and a 192.168.0.X address.
Larry - Try doing "hairpin NAT" on your iptables box. Add the following
rule after your port 80 rule (placement n
.
Larry - Try doing "hairpin NAT" on your iptables box. Add the following
rule after your port 80 rule (placement not critical but nice to keep
the webserver stuff together):
$IPTABLES -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp --dport 80 -s 192.168.0.0/24 \
-j MASQUERADE
(Remember that the \ is a line c
et some things secure and
> working. My internal network access via 192.168.0.X cannot connect to the
> web site once I load this particular firewall.
>
> Is the
> iptables -P INPUT DROP
> iptables -P FORWARD DROP
> iptables -P OUTPUT DROP
Sorry, my bad. The policy statements
> working. My internal network access via 192.168.0.X cannot connect to the
> web site once I load this particular firewall.
>
> Is the
> iptables -P INPUT DROP
> iptables -P FORWARD DROP
> iptables -P OUTPUT DROP
Sorry, my bad. The policy statements are right there near the beg
web site once I load this particular firewall.
Is the
iptables -P INPUT DROP
iptables -P FORWARD DROP
iptables -P OUTPUT DROP
not considered the default policy and the rest of the tables considered
to be turning back on only the needed services?
But of course my main problem is that my code i
On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 08:26:13PM -0500, lrnobs wrote:
> I have the following iptables basically borrowed from
> http://www.sns.ias.edu/~jns/security/iptables/rules.html but I need to open
> up access to a web site running with Tomcat and Apache.
>
> I tried to modify it (in
I have the following iptables basically borrowed from
http://www.sns.ias.edu/~jns/security/iptables/rules.html
but I need to open up access to a web site running with Tomcat and Apache.
I tried to modify it (in bold) below to open up access to my web site but I am locked out.
Thanks for any help
On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 20:34, Earl C. Potter wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 04:53:42PM -0500, Peter Fleck wrote:
> >
> > How do I get iptables to allow requests through port 443? The basic
> > Redhat configuration tools don't seem to address this. Is there a
> &g
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 04:53:42PM -0500, Peter Fleck wrote:
>
> How do I get iptables to allow requests through port 443? The basic
> Redhat configuration tools don't seem to address this. Is there a
> good tutorial on working with iptables?
I've had pretty descent luck
>-Original Message-
>From: Peter Fleck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:54 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: iptables: Open Port 443
>
>
>After tearing much hair out trying to set up a secure apache server,
>I've discovere
After tearing much hair out trying to set up a secure apache server,
I've discovered that our iptables setup blocks port 443. (Turning off
iptables got it to work just fine.)
This is the Redhat 9 distribution.
How do I get iptables to allow requests through port 443? The basic
R
Hello to all EXPERTS!
I have a question about IPTABLES.
I'm using IP Masquerading and Iptables (Red Hat 8)
How can I filter incoming ip numbers by last 3 numbers (i.e.
216.109.118.XXX)
and redirect them to one IP number after NAT to two different ports (i.e. 80
and 8080) ?
Re
I have Red Hat 9.0 intalled, with minimum pakets option:
I am building dual host: eth1 - external, eth0(10.10.1.1 255.255.0.0) -
internal interface
I just want the packet to hit eth0 for testing, but it never dose
I am running the folowing script:
iptables -P INPUT DROP
iptables -P OUTPUT
Ok. I think you're talking about something else.
Here it's ok to say you should have rules to restrict outgoing traffic from
your gateway.
But things should be very well considered before taking any action.
One of the good things about restricting outgoing traffic is because you can
stop some of th
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Jack Bowling wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 01:45:52PM -0400, Parker Morse wrote:
> > I'm not the best person to be asking about firewalls, but:
> >
> > I think you're confused about the way OUTPUT works. It acts on any
> > packets sent out by your system. Unless you are co
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 01:45:52PM -0400, Parker Morse wrote:
> I'm not the best person to be asking about firewalls, but:
>
> I think you're confused about the way OUTPUT works. It acts on any
> packets sent out by your system. Unless you are concerned about how
> users of your system are going
Of course. Applications will not use port 80 to
connect to web servers. They will use random ports. Blocking all ports will
cause problems.
UTPUT, don't make sense if
I put:
iptables -t filter -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 515 -j ACCEPT
to only accept the output to the printer port?? And here I had to put
...OUTPUT
-p tcp --source-port 515 -j ACCEPT ??? And I have to accept the output
to my
ssh, ok?
I'm not the best person to
Thanks Parser,
My script is ok now! You are right : I need to accept connection FROM port. But
I needed the udp rules to samba because without the liberantion samba udp, it
didn't work.
Only another question, if I put ACCEPT in OUTPUT, don't make sense if I put:
iptables -t filter -A
On Friday, Sep 26, 2003, at 15:43 US/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am writing a script to iptables but I have problems because all the
connection
with the computer are closed and I think this is because the policies
in the
INPUT, FORWARD and OUTPUT
See my script and if someone knows why
Hello People,
I am writing a script to iptables but I have problems because all the connection
with the computer are closed and I think this is because the policies in the
INPUT, FORWARD and OUTPUT
See my script and if someone knows why all the connection are closed please
help
me..gratefull
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 04:50 pm, Noah wrote:
> okay how do I convert the ipchains configuratoin to iptables. is there
> something out there for newbies like me? or is there a way to include my
> ipchains configuraiton file when iptables fires up?
>
> are my questions ev
Noah wrote:
How do I flush the accumulated in the IPTABLES drop policies without
complete
reloading the whole firewall service?
"flush the accumulated"? Do you mean zero the packet counters
(accumulated?), delete rules, flush a chain, or change the policy?
> Chain INPUT (policy
okay how do I convert the ipchains configuratoin to iptables. is there
something out there for newbies like me? or is there a way to include my
ipchains configuraiton file when iptables fires up?
are my questions even making sense here? :)
- Noah
If you're talking about an automated tool,
redhat 8.0
kernel 2.4.20
iptables 1.28
How do I flush the accumulated in the IPTABLES drop policies without complete
reloading the whole firewall service?
I want to drop these?
snip ---
# ./firewall status | less
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source
> >
> > My version of Red Hat 7.2 came with iptables already precompiled and
> > ready to install. If you are sure they are missing from your system
> > (does "insmod ip_tables" do anything?), then I'd check the cd first.
> > Look in /lib/module
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:40:50 -0700, Brenden T. wrote
> Noah wrote:
>
> >okay thanks for the wonderful replies.
> >
> >I am starting off on this. I see that the module is not loaded.
> >
> >currently have the 2.4.20-20.8 kernel on an i386 machine. how can
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 15:40, Brenden T. wrote:
> Noah wrote:
>
> >okay thanks for the wonderful replies.
> >
> >I am starting off on this. I see that the module is not loaded.
> >
> >currently have the 2.4.20-20.8 kernel on an i386 machine. how can I quickly
Noah wrote:
okay thanks for the wonderful replies.
I am starting off on this. I see that the module is not loaded.
currently have the 2.4.20-20.8 kernel on an i386 machine. how can I quickly
get the iptables module installed?
I dont have the kernel source. so do I need to download it or is
okay thanks for the wonderful replies.
I am starting off on this. I see that the module is not loaded.
currently have the 2.4.20-20.8 kernel on an i386 machine. how can I quickly
get the iptables module installed?
I dont have the kernel source. so do I need to download it or is there some
Jianping Zhu wrote:
I have a redhat 7.1 sever with a smb sever on it which have several Xp
client machies client1 client2 I use IPtable as firewall
I want to mount a folder on client1 to my server
The problem if i turn off iptables, I can mount a folder of client1 to
smb, but if the
I have a redhat 7.1 sever with a smb sever on it which have several Xp
client machies client1 client2 I use IPtable as firewall
I want to mount a folder on client1 to my server
The problem if i turn off iptables, I can mount a folder of client1 to
smb, but if the firewall is on i can not
obia. I have never
> >>really used IPT.
> >>
> >>It takes about 4,000 lines for Korea and China alone and that's with
> >>CIDR formatting.
> >
> >You could shrink it a bit...
> >
>
> In addition to shrinking the list by using larger networ
;, I'd have nto known what to comment out of the init script.
> >
> > This is RedHat 8.0 right? The RedHat 9 init script doesn't do it.
> >
> > > So far, it's caused one of my systems to crash and reboot, and another to
> > > lock up.
> >
> &g
> > So far, it's caused one of my systems to crash and reboot, and another to
> > lock up.
>
> Another side effect is that it causes hosts to hang during shut down or
> reboot at "stopping iptables". A major pain if you're rebooting remotely.
>
> Might be
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Sean Estabrooks wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:19:27 -0500 (EST)
> Mike Burger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Can anyone tell me whose bright idea it was to have the init script for
> > iptables attempt to remove the iptables modul
> Be very surprised if this was always a problem with RH8 given its
> maturity.
I first started seeing it after the last errata update to iptables
for RH 8.0 (a few weeks ago).
--
Ian
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/li
s RedHat 8.0 right? The RedHat 9 init script doesn't do it.
>
> > So far, it's caused one of my systems to crash and reboot, and another to
> > lock up.
>
> Another side effect is that it causes hosts to hang during shut down or
> reboot at "stopping ip
y systems to crash and reboot, and another to
> lock up.
Another side effect is that it causes hosts to hang during shut down or
reboot at "stopping iptables". A major pain if you're rebooting remotely.
Might be a good idea to post it on bugzilla along with the fix.
--
Ian
-
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:19:27 -0500 (EST)
Mike Burger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can anyone tell me whose bright idea it was to have the init script for
> iptables attempt to remove the iptables modules when one runs a "service
> iptables stop"?
>
> So far, i
Can anyone tell me whose bright idea it was to have the init script for
iptables attempt to remove the iptables modules when one runs a "service
iptables stop"?
So far, it's caused one of my systems to crash and reboot, and another to
lock up.
If it weren't for the fact
dport 137:139 -j
ACCEPT
-A RH-Lokkit-0-50-INPUT -p udp -m udp -s 192.168.1.0/24 --dport 137:139 -j
ACCEPT
the -s option tells iptables what source IPs to match the packet against, so
if your ip range is different, you'll need to put a different number there.
Of course, there's always
d setting up all the user permissions. When i turn
iptables
> off, i get a password prompt in windows when i click on the server.
>
> when i turn ip tables on, it just sits for 20 seconds and then
tells me i
> dont have permission to access this network resource.
Hi Ian. Hopefully I can
Hi,
>-Original Message-
>From: Ian L [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 8:33 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: samba and iptables
>
>
>Hey all,
>
>I'm trying to set up samba to work with a win2k3 server and a redhat 8
>se
user permissions. When i turn iptables
> off, i get a password prompt in windows when i click on the server.
>
> when i turn ip tables on, it just sits for 20 seconds and then tells me i
> dont have permission to access this network resource.
Hi Ian. Hopefully I can offer a suggestion
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 20:32, Ian L wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I'm trying to set up samba to work with a win2k3 server and a redhat 8
> server. I've got samba 2.x installed. It seems to be working, although i
> havent finished setting up all the user permissions. When i turn
Hey all,
I'm trying to set up samba to work with a win2k3 server and a redhat 8
server. I've got samba 2.x installed. It seems to be working, although i
havent finished setting up all the user permissions. When i turn iptables
off, i get a password prompt in windows when i click on
Hi everyone. I'm having a problem connecting to my Red Hat 9 server using
Starnet Micro X-Win running on a WinXP system. Everything is configured
correctly on the WinXP side, but the iptables is blocking the incoming
request from my WinXP system. If I disable iptables and then t
tting.
You could shrink it a bit...
In addition to shrinking the list by using larger networks, you can
optimize your IPTables setup by testing more specific packets.
For instance, if you only want to block connections to apache from those
networks, create a new chain and only jump there on pa
At 12:16 9/3/2003 -0500, you wrote:
There are ways (though I can't remember what they are) to set up your system
in such a way as to dynamically block IPs from which you are receiving
attacks. I believe that they involve setting up iptables to work with snort
(http://www.snort.org), but I
On Wed, 2003-09-03 at 18:54, Res wrote:
>
> You could shrink it a bit...
>
> > "/sbin/iptables -A INPUT -s 61.32.0.0/16 -j REJECT"
>
> Why double the load by sending them a packet back, just drop them totally
> without a reply, replace -j REJECT with -j
219.138.0.0/15
61.207.0.0/16
202.96.1.1/14
202.92.1.1/14
203.9.58.128/25
211.64.0.0/10
211.45.0.0/12
211.129.0.0/9
211.49.0.0/12
211.20.0.0/14
211.1.0.0/12
This got rid of most of the problem for us, your mileage will probably
vary though...
> "/sbin/iptables -A INPUT -s 61.32.0.0/16 -j REJ
On Wed, 2003-09-03 at 13:21, Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-09-03 at 13:16, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:
> This is potentially a very bad idea, depending on the scenario. It's
> trivial to spoof an innocent bystander's address, causing dynamic
> blocking of those systems/networks. OpenBSD has a n
On Wed, 2003-09-03 at 13:16, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:
> There are ways (though I can't remember what they are) to set up your system
> in such a way as to dynamically block IPs from which you are receiving
> attacks. I believe that they involve setting up iptables to work with
e, much more similar to ipchains or ipfilter
syntactically. Performance-wise, you're going to appreciate it for your
needs. From what I've heard, it handles large tables of addresses very
well, using hashes to do quick lookups.
> > 2. I have single lines like:
> > &
ave 4,000 REJECT lines followed by
an ALLOW rule, then every request that is *authorized* to use your box will
have to go through 4,000 tests first.
I expect that you will rapidly notice the CPU usage go up, and your network
"speed" and server response go down.
> 2. I have single l
e create a problem? Is that even a very large
table?
2. I have single lines like:
"/sbin/iptables -A INPUT -s 61.32.0.0/16 -j REJECT"
What is the most efficient means of logging matches? I suppose that I
could create another shell script replacing REJECT with LOG or a
At 00:27 9/2/2003 +0200, you wrote:
I work with http://www.fwbuilder.org/ and iptables.
fwbuilder is running on a internal node to build the rules and i do the
upload for a new police over ssh to the firewall.
Shorewall (http://www.shorewall.net) is my favorite, and runs 23 production
servers
Try Firestarter at http://firestarter.sourceforge.net
Very easy to setup in GUI.
funtom wrote:
Hi,
I work with http://www.fwbuilder.org/ and iptables.
fwbuilder is running on a internal node to build the rules and i do the
upload for a new police over ssh to the firewall.
regards,
thomas
Hi,
I work with http://www.fwbuilder.org/ and iptables.
fwbuilder is running on a internal node to build the rules and i do the
upload for a new police over ssh to the firewall.
regards,
thomas
- Original Message -
From: "Geoffrey Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMA
Thank You for your prompt reply. I haven't tried this yet as I have
finally gotten it to work by tunneling through my SSH program. That is
suppose to be much more secure anyway. I will still try this out sometime
soon though. Just because I need to learn how to do IPtables anyway.
t
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 19:17:48 -0500
Steve Buehler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am REAL new to iptables. I installed RedHat 9 with the firewall set on
> "High". The firewall only allows things like http, ftp, smtp and
> domain. How can I open up the firewall so that
I am REAL new to iptables. I installed RedHat 9 with the firewall set on
"High". The firewall only allows things like http, ftp, smtp and
domain. How can I open up the firewall so that I can open it up for VNC
connections to the server. I presume that you use iptables, but I hav
I didn't want to try to learn the internals of iptables (blush). I found a
gui frontend to iptables called "guarddog" that is really easy to use.
Guarddog uses /etc/rc.firewall as its script. I never used redhat's
firewall, so I'm not sure where it is located.
At 8/24/2003 20:06 -0300, you wrote:
I would appreciate some suggestions from those of you with much more
experience than me for a gui and/or an idiots guide to iptables.
I would suggest forgoing Red Hat's tools altogether and using Shorewall
(http://www.shorewall.net). It is not a firewall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 20:06:10 -0300, Geoffrey Lane wrote:
> I've been doing a net search on google for gui, iptables based firewall
> program to edit, view, add to the firewall rules that were set during my
> redhat 9 installation. Bei
On Sun, 2003-08-24 at 19:06, Geoffrey Lane wrote:
> I've been doing a net search on google for gui, iptables based firewall
> program to edit, view, add to the firewall rules that were set during my
> redhat 9 installation. Being a newbie to linux I want something relitively
&g
I've been doing a net search on google for gui, iptables based firewall
program to edit, view, add to the firewall rules that were set during my
redhat 9 installation. Being a newbie to linux I want something relitively
simple, gui, a builder/editor not another startup program or servi
You has already sttoped the iptables rules to check if all works fine?
I supposed that the nameserver difinition in the /etc/resolv.conf are
correct... check this.
And a hopeful application for you is "iptraf".. that you can filter
any traffic to solve the problem.
The mailserver
Dear Listies,
I have a issue with a rule set on iptables. I am confident that my issue
is with IPtables and not some other app, as I have run tests to isolate
the problem.
I have a mail server (Postfix) running on RH9 with iptables at the
front. My mail fails because the server cannot resolve
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Simran Hansrai wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I am trying to forward port 8080 on my redhat 8.0 box to port 80 on my
> solaris box and I have done the following so far:
>
> and issued the following command:
>
> iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -p tcp -d 192
gt;
> and issued the following command:
>
> iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -p tcp -d 192.168.0.7 --dport 8080 -j
> DNAT --to 192.168.0.5:80
>
> I have made sure that apache is running on 192.168.0.5:80 by directly access
> the site. But when I try and access it through: http:/
ot; in my /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward file
>
> and issued the following command:
>
> iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -p tcp -d 192.168.0.7 --dport 8080 -j
> DNAT --to 192.168.0.5:80
>
> I have made sure that apache is running on 192.168.0.5:80 by directly access
> the site.
gt;
> and issued the following command:
>
> iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -p tcp -d 192.168.0.7 --dport 8080 -j
> DNAT --to 192.168.0.5:80
That should work - it is the same rule I use here for portforwarding
to my webserver.
Perhaps your problem may be that the internal and external addr
Hi Guys,
I am trying to forward port 8080 on my redhat 8.0 box to port 80 on my
solaris box and I have done the following so far:
Made sure that I have a "1" in my /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward file
and issued the following command:
iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -p tcp -d 192.168.0
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 08:56:25 +0200
George Nicholls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> I have postfix running on RH9 with SMTPS. It works fine. I layered
> iptables onthe box with rules allowing SMTP AUTH (port 113). When I
> disable iptables, smtps works per
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 08:56:25 +0200
George Nicholls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> I have postfix running on RH9 with SMTPS. It works fine. I layered
> iptables onthe box with rules allowing SMTP AUTH (port 113). When I
> disable iptables, smtps works per
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 08:56:25 +0200
George Nicholls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> I have postfix running on RH9 with SMTPS. It works fine. I layered
> iptables onthe box with rules allowing SMTP AUTH (port 113). When I
> disable iptables, smtps works per
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 08:56:25 +0200 George Nicholls wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> I have postfix running on RH9 with SMTPS. It works fine. I layered
> iptables onthe box with rules allowing SMTP AUTH (port 113). When I
> disable iptables, smtps works perfectly. When I enable iptables
Dear List,
I have postfix running on RH9 with SMTPS. It works fine. I layered
iptables onthe box with rules allowing SMTP AUTH (port 113). When I
disable iptables, smtps works perfectly. When I enable iptables, port
113 is closed (?).
My question is:
Does smtps listen on a different port to 113
/etc/sysconfig/iptables has this rule
-A RH-Lokkit-0-50-INPUT -s 12.224.128.149/255.255.254.0 -j REJECT
Yet, 12.224.128.149 can still connect. Any idea why? Could it relate to the machine
having more than one network card? I'm using eth1. Port eth0 is disabled. Is
iptables assuming
Mike Vanecek wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:58:12 -400, Charles Denentt wrote
>
>>You might want to check out http://woogie.net/linksysmon. I
>>installed this a couple of weeks ago on my RH9 system with the
>>Linksys 4 port router/switch. it also tells you about an
>>undocumented log facilit
> > You might want to check out http://woogie.net/linksysmon. I
> > installed this a couple of weeks ago on my RH9 system with the
> > Linksys 4 port router/switch. it also tells you about an
> > undocumented log facility in the linksys.
>
> Absolutely perfect. Installed and logging.
>
> Than
On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 13:45, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:
> > > You might want to check out http://woogie.net/linksysmon. I
> > > installed this a couple of weeks ago on my RH9 system with the
> > > Linksys 4 port router/switch. it also tells you about an
> > > undocumented log facility in the link
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:58:12 -400, Charles Denentt wrote
> You might want to check out http://woogie.net/linksysmon. I
> installed this a couple of weeks ago on my RH9 system with the
> Linksys 4 port router/switch. it also tells you about an
> undocumented log facility in the linksys.
Charlie,
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:58:12 -400, Charles Denentt wrote
> > On 04 Aug 2003 16:44:30 +0100, Nick Lindsell wrote
> > > >
> > > > Dumb question time. If I tell the router to send log information to
the Linux
> > > > server, how do I tell the Linux server to accept and log them? I
assume the
> > > > Li
> On 04 Aug 2003 16:44:30 +0100, Nick Lindsell wrote
> > >
> > > Dumb question time. If I tell the router to send log information to the Linux
> > > server, how do I tell the Linux server to accept and log them? I assume the
> > > Linksys router will send packets to the Linux server with log inform
On 04 Aug 2003 16:44:30 +0100, Nick Lindsell wrote
> >
> > Dumb question time. If I tell the router to send log information to the Linux
> > server, how do I tell the Linux server to accept and log them? I assume the
> > Linksys router will send packets to the Linux server with log information. Ho
bly just put in
> > the rule that Jason suggested above.
>
> Thank you for the reply. I have enabled just those smb ports needed for the
> LAN. All others are blocked. I log all packets not explicitly blocked or
> accepted. Hence, I was seeing the 135 info in my iptables log along
On 04 Aug 2003 11:31:08 -0400, Jason Dixon wrote
> On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 11:26, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> > On 04 Aug 2003 09:29:52 -0400, Jason Dixon wrote
> > > On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 09:22, Mike Vanecek wrote:
>
> > Dumb question time. If I tell the router to send log information to the Linux
> > se
cking you, you
> could implement an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) like Snort
> (http://www.snort.org), otherwise, you should probably just put in
> the rule that Jason suggested above.
Thank you for the reply. I have enabled just those smb ports needed for the
LAN. All others are blo
>
> Dumb question time. If I tell the router to send log information to the Linux
> server, how do I tell the Linux server to accept and log them? I assume the
> Linksys router will send packets to the Linux server with log information. How
> do those get processed by the Linux system?
Add a "-
On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 11:26, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> On 04 Aug 2003 09:29:52 -0400, Jason Dixon wrote
> > On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 09:22, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> Dumb question time. If I tell the router to send log information to the Linux
> server, how do I tell the Linux server to accept and log them?
On 04 Aug 2003 09:29:52 -0400, Jason Dixon wrote
> On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 09:22, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> > I am starting to see more packets to port 135 in my log (default reject). They
> > seem to be from all over. The definition of the port is:
> >
> > # Mike Berrow <---non
> On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 09:22, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> > I am starting to see more packets to port 135 in my log (default reject). They
> > seem to be from all over. The definition of the port is:
> >
> > # Mike Berrow <---none--->
> > epmap 135/tcpDCE endpoint
On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 09:22, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> I am starting to see more packets to port 135 in my log (default reject). They
> seem to be from all over. The definition of the port is:
>
> # Mike Berrow <---none--->
> epmap 135/tcpDCE endpoint resolution
I am starting to see more packets to port 135 in my log (default reject). They
seem to be from all over. The definition of the port is:
# Mike Berrow <---none--->
epmap 135/tcpDCE endpoint resolution
epmap 135/udpDCE endpoint resolution
Would s
>
> > I have a question regarding iptables and natting. What I'm trying to do is
> > setup a iptables firewall to protect my LAN and Servers.
> > The ketch is that I'm using my Cisco Router to do the Natting.. So what I'm
> > trying to do bascially is just
On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 12:52:32AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> I have a question regarding iptables and natting. What I'm trying to do is
> setup a iptables firewall to protect my LAN and Servers.
> The ketch is that I'm using my Cisco Router to
Hey all,
I have a questoin regarding iptables and natting. What I'm trying to do is
setup a iptables firewall to protect my LAN and Servers.
The ketch is that I'm using my Cisco Router to do the Natting.. So what I'm
trying to do bascially is just route across the 2 nics in the
R
1 - 100 of 779 matches
Mail list logo
