From: "David H. Askew" <daskew2@kc.rr.com>
To: netfilter users mailing list <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>
Subject: RE: firewall host problem
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:01:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1066618897.2317.11.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1147.192.168.111.123.1066615354.squirrel@mail.linknet-solutions.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4093 bytes --]
This is the line I added .. thank you for your suggestion anyway
iptables -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 21:02, Josh Berry wrote:
> You are only allowing port 22 for input, you have to allow related traffic
> back. Something like:
>
> iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp -i <input interface> -m state --state
> ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
>
>
> > I thought about that too.. but
> >
> > This output seems to indicate a default policy of ACCEPT on the output
> > chain. I've not yet formulated a set of rules to handle outbound
> > traffic.
> >
> > iptables -L .. partial output ...
> >
> > Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
> > target prot opt source destination
> >
> > or .. am I missing your point ?
> >
> > On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 20:44, Mark E. Donaldson wrote:
> >> David - Where are your OUTPUT chain Rules? If you want to ping (or
> >> anything
> >> else) your ISP gateway from the firewall itself, you need rules in your
> >> OUTPUT chain to permit this. If your OUTPUT default policy is set to
> >> DROP,
> >> then all packets generated by your firewall are being dropped.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: David H. Askew [mailto:daskew2@kc.rr.com]
> >> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 2:44 PM
> >> To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
> >> Subject: firewall host problem
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ok .. so 'I'm trying to setup my first iptables firewall .. and I've got
> >> a semi functional setup so far ... but I do have one small problem .. my
> >> firewall machine .. which is performing NAT for my home network.. cannot
> >> access the Internet with any standard tools ... tracepath .. ping ..
> >> etc. I know network connectivity is fine .. because my internal
> >> machines function properly.
> >>
> >> My router/firewall has 3 interfaces ....
> >> eth0: ISP
> >> eth1: Home Subnet 1
> >> eth2: Home Subnet 2
> >>
> >> eth2 can ping my ISP gateway
> >> eth1 can ping my ISP gateway
> >> eth0 can not ping my ISP gateway
> >>
> >>
> >> my firewall script is below ...
> >>
> >> I've recently switched from an ACCEPT default policy to the DROP default
> >> policy below. I didn't have this problem previously, so I know i'I've
> >> just forgotten to allow something .. but I'm having trouble coming to a
> >> logical conclusion ....
> >>
> >> ...any help .. critique ... advice you could provide would be helpful
> >>
> >> -dave
> >>
> >>
> >> iptables --flush
> >> iptables --table nat --flush
> >> iptables --delete-chain
> >> iptables --table nat --delete-chain
> >>
> >>
> >> # Enable packet forwarding in the kernel
> >> echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> >>
> >> # Setup IP FORWARDing and Masquerading
> >> iptables --table nat --append POSTROUTING --out-interface eth0 -j
> >> MASQUERADE
> >> iptables --append FORWARD --in-interface eth1 -j ACCEPT
> >> iptables --append FORWARD --in-interface eth2 -j ACCEPT
> >>
> >>
> >> #enable connection tracking
> >> iptables -I FORWARD -m state --state INVALID -j DROP
> >> iptables -I FORWARD -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
> >>
> >> iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -i eth0 -s 0/0 -d 0/0 --dport 22 -j ACCEPT
> >> iptables -A INPUT -p udp -i eth0 -s 0/0 -d 0/0 --dport 22 -j ACCEPT
> >>
> >> iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -i eth2 -s 0/0 -d 0/0 --dport 22 -j ACCEPT
> >> iptables -A INPUT -p udp -i eth2 -s 0/0 -d 0/0 --dport 22 -j ACCEPT
> >>
> >> iptables -P INPUT DROP
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a light bulb ?
> >>
> >> Answer : None, they just declare darkness a new standard.
> >>
> > --
> > How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a light bulb ?
> >
> > Answer : None, they just declare darkness a new standard.
> >
> >
>
>
> Thanks,
> Josh Berry, CTO
> LinkNet-Solutions
> 469-831-8543
> josh.berry@linknet-solutions.com
--
How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a light bulb ?
Answer : None, they just declare darkness a new standard.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-20 3:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-19 21:44 firewall host problem David H. Askew
2003-10-20 1:44 ` Mark E. Donaldson
2003-10-20 1:49 ` David H. Askew
2003-10-20 2:02 ` Josh Berry
2003-10-20 3:01 ` David H. Askew [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1066618897.2317.11.camel@lappy \
--to=daskew2@kc.rr.com \
--cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.