Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #167047
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: Firewall - basic config? |
| Date | 2016-04-24 11:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rro3v-1Ak-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rr9ea-6Ge-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <rraaf-7rl-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <rrkCB-7Fn-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 00:17:51 -0500 Michael Milliman <michael.e.milliman@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Any suggestions/comments would be much appreciated. Thanks > >> very much. > > Assuming you'd want to keep ufw, you'd need to worry about: > > > >> Chain ufw-after-input (1 references) > >> target prot opt source destination > >> ufw-skip-to-policy-input udp -- anywhere anywhere udp > >> dpt:netbios-ns > >> ufw-skip-to-policy-input udp -- anywhere anywhere udp > >> dpt:netbios-dgm > >> ufw-skip-to-policy-input tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp > >> dpt:netbios-ssn > >> ufw-skip-to-policy-input tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp > >> dpt:microsoft-ds > > There's no reason to accept these unless you're using Samba (either > > the server or client). > However, if you look at the ufw-skip-to-policy-input chain, it simply > DROPs everything, so there is no hole here, as far as I can tell. > Indeed, this chain specifies all protocols, from anywhere to anywhere, > target DROP. So, in the end, all packets to these destination ports > (dpt) are DROPed. Good catch. I agree here. Although it would help to see if these rules apply to a certain network interface (see below). > >> ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere udp > >> spt:bootps dpt:bootpc > > So, first they compose a perfectly good rule for DHCP client > > (ufw-before-input chain), but then they allow udp:68 unconditionally in > > ufw-after-input chain. I'll assume that something very clever is going > > on here. > Correct me if I'm wrong, however, the ufw-before-input chain concerns me > greatly. The first rule here ACCEPTs all packets of all protocols > coming from anywhere and going to anywhere. This appears to be an > incredibly big hole. The above rule Reco mentions, will never be seen > as it is quite a bit further down the chain, after everything has > already been ACCEPTed. Surely, I'm reading something wrong?:-\ I believe this to be an artifact of 'iptables -L', and the actual rule refers to lo interface only. For example, on my system this scary rule: # iptables -nL INPUT | head -3 ... ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Actually means this: # iptables -nvL INPUT | head -3 ... ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Reco
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Firewall - basic config? Harris Paltrowitz <harrisupstate@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-23 19:10 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2016-04-23 20:10 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? Michael Milliman <michael.e.milliman@gmail.com> - 2016-04-24 07:20 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2016-04-24 11:00 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? Michael Milliman <michael.e.milliman@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 04:10 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-04-23 22:00 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? shawn wilson <ag4ve.us@gmail.com> - 2016-04-25 15:50 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? cbannister@slingshot.co.nz - 2016-04-27 10:40 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2016-04-27 11:30 +0200
Re: Firewall - basic config? Harris Paltrowitz <harrisupstate@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-27 13:50 +0200
csiph-web