* blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT
[not found] <b400c69a0707311002j46a9505du414c2058edbe79e2@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2007-07-31 22:04 ` Maxim Veksler
2007-07-31 22:18 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
2007-07-31 23:51 ` Grant Taylor
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maxim Veksler @ 2007-07-31 22:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter
Hello,
I have my machine configured to allow all traffic in INPUT table, but
I would like to block access to port tcp22 from all besides several
ip's.
The following rules as the basic of what I'm trying to achieve:
/sbin/iptables -A INPUT -s ! a.b.c.d/29 -p tcp --dport 22 -j DROP
/sbin/iptables -A INPUT -s ! e.f.g.h -p tcp --dport 22 -j DROP
How can I do a "AND" between them as in
if (-s ! a.b.c.d/29 AND -s ! e.f.g.h) then -j DROP ?
Thank you,
Maxim.
--
Cheers,
Maxim Veksler
"Free as in Freedom" - Do u GNU ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT
2007-07-31 22:04 ` blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT Maxim Veksler
@ 2007-07-31 22:18 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
2007-07-31 23:40 ` Grant Taylor
2007-07-31 23:51 ` Grant Taylor
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maximilian Wilhelm @ 2007-07-31 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter
Am Wednesday, den 1 August hub Maxim Veksler folgendes in die Tasten:
Hi!
> I have my machine configured to allow all traffic in INPUT table, but
> I would like to block access to port tcp22 from all besides several
> ip's.
> The following rules as the basic of what I'm trying to achieve:
> /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -s ! a.b.c.d/29 -p tcp --dport 22 -j DROP
> /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -s ! e.f.g.h -p tcp --dport 22 -j DROP
> How can I do a "AND" between them as in
> if (-s ! a.b.c.d/29 AND -s ! e.f.g.h) then -j DROP ?
You can't.
But what's wrong with the two rules?
What you could do if you like is to pass every connection to port 22
to a subchain like this:
iptables -N filter_ssh_access
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j filter_ssh_access
iptables -A filter_ssh_access -s ! a.b.c.d/29 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-admin-prohibited
iptables -A filter_ssh_access -s ! e.f.g.h -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-admin-prohibited
You might have noticed that I've changed the "DROP" to "REJECT" with
fitting type which will make the live of you and other people easier
when debugging anything related to ssh access to this box.
HTH
Ciao
Max
--
Follow the white penguin.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT
2007-07-31 22:18 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
@ 2007-07-31 23:40 ` Grant Taylor
2007-08-01 13:28 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Grant Taylor @ 2007-07-31 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mail List - Netfilter
On 7/31/2007 5:18 PM, Maximilian Wilhelm wrote:
> You can't.
Yes you can. Well if you understand the concepts of latter logic used
when electro-mechanical relays were used to control elevators you can.
> But what's wrong with the two rules?
Nothing. The old saying "If it isn't broke, don't fix it..." with it's
third stanza "...optimize it!" comes to mind.
> What you could do if you like is to pass every connection to port 22
> to a subchain like this:
>
> iptables -N filter_ssh_access
> iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j filter_ssh_access
Yes...
> iptables -A filter_ssh_access -s ! a.b.c.d/29 -j REJECT --reject-with
> icmp-admin-prohibited
> iptables -A filter_ssh_access -s ! e.f.g.h -j REJECT --reject-with
> icmp-admin-prohibited
Oh, so close.
> You might have noticed that I've changed the "DROP" to "REJECT" with
> fitting type which will make the live of you and other people easier
> when debugging anything related to ssh access to this box.
The problem with this is that if you have an IP address of e.f.g.h, the
first rule will reject the connection. Negative logic does not work
quite as you would expect it to. You have to work with inverted
positive logic below (invert the result of the entire set of logic).
There is also the fact that fewer and fewer things know how to handle
error messages like this, or if they do they do not display them to the
end user. (Thanks M$!) You may have better luck with a basic REJECT
target than one that specifies the ICMP error code unless you know that
you are working with a client application that can correctly interpret.
Try this on for size.
iptables -N filter_ssh_access
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j filter_ssh_access
iptables -A filter_ssh_access -s a.b.c.d/29 -j ACCEPT
iptables -A filter_ssh_access -s e.f.g.h -j ACCEPT
iptables -A filter_ssh_access -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-admin-prohibited
In this case, you are jumping to a sub-chain just like Max suggested.
However the difference is that you are accepting on known good and then
rejecting after the list of known good has been exhausted. This will
scale compared to rules conflicting with each other, which is what the
OP and Max had happening.
Grant. . . .
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT
2007-07-31 22:04 ` blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT Maxim Veksler
2007-07-31 22:18 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
@ 2007-07-31 23:51 ` Grant Taylor
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Grant Taylor @ 2007-07-31 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mail List - Netfilter
On 7/31/2007 5:04 PM, Maxim Veksler wrote:
> I have my machine configured to allow all traffic in INPUT table, but
> I would like to block access to port tcp22 from all besides several
> ip's.
*nod*
> How can I do a "AND" between them as in
Wrong logic operator. The question could also be written as "How do I
block all connections not from the set A or B or C or ...". One way to
achieve this is with the IPSet match extension (which I have not worked
with, so this may not be syntactically correct).
iptables -A INPUT ! -m set --set sshclients src -j DROP
In theory this rule will say "if the source ip is not in set sshclients
DROP the packet".
This will allow you to use the user space utility ipset to control your
(iphash) set which is your list of allowed ssh clients.
Grant. . . .
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT
[not found] <200708010731.l717Vte0020939@mail3.jubileegroup.co.uk>
@ 2007-08-01 8:30 ` G.W. Haywood
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: G.W. Haywood @ 2007-08-01 8:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter
Hi there,
On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 Grant Taylor wrote:
> Wrong logic operator. The question could also be written as "How do I
> block all connections not from the set A or B or C or ...".
>
> One way to achieve this is with the IPSet match extension (which I
> have not worked with, so this may not be syntactically correct).
>
> iptables -A INPUT ! -m set --set sshclients src -j DROP
Looks good to me. Here's the most recent addition to my roughly two
dozen ipsets:
iptables -I INPUT 98 -m set --set BLOCKSET08 src -j DROP
(My BLOCKSET08 set blocks /8 IP ranges. :)
FWIW I have currently block a little over 26,000 IP ranges in 25 sets
and the performance is fine on very modest hardware.
At present I believe there are some issues compiling ipsets and the
latest 2.6 kernels, probably worth looking before you leap.
--
73,
Ged.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT
2007-07-31 23:40 ` Grant Taylor
@ 2007-08-01 13:28 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maximilian Wilhelm @ 2007-08-01 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter
Am Tuesday, den 31 July hub Grant Taylor folgendes in die Tasten:
> >But what's wrong with the two rules?
> Nothing. The old saying "If it isn't broke, don't fix it..." with it's
> third stanza "...optimize it!" comes to mind.
:)
[...]
> >You might have noticed that I've changed the "DROP" to "REJECT" with
> >fitting type which will make the live of you and other people easier
> >when debugging anything related to ssh access to this box.
> The problem with this is that if you have an IP address of e.f.g.h, the
> first rule will reject the connection. Negative logic does not work
> quite as you would expect it to. You have to work with inverted
> positive logic below (invert the result of the entire set of logic).
Argh.
I should not write mails when totally tired.
I'm really sorry for the fnord.
Thanks for getting it right.
> There is also the fact that fewer and fewer things know how to handle
> error messages like this, or if they do they do not display them to the
> end user. (Thanks M$!) You may have better luck with a basic REJECT
> target than one that specifies the ICMP error code unless you know that
> you are working with a client application that can correctly interpret.
[...]
You're sadly right here, too.
But I have to state that tcpdump (which most probably will be most
often used when debugging network problems) shows this correct.
I think ethereal^Wwhireshark will do so, too.
Ciao
Max
--
Follow the white penguin.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-08-01 13:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <b400c69a0707311002j46a9505du414c2058edbe79e2@mail.gmail.com>
2007-07-31 22:04 ` blocking access to port 22 when INPUT policy is ACCEPT Maxim Veksler
2007-07-31 22:18 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
2007-07-31 23:40 ` Grant Taylor
2007-08-01 13:28 ` Maximilian Wilhelm
2007-07-31 23:51 ` Grant Taylor
[not found] <200708010731.l717Vte0020939@mail3.jubileegroup.co.uk>
2007-08-01 8:30 ` G.W. Haywood
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox