search for: fwcmd

...ilter everything from the outside except for specified services (http, ftp...) and share the internet connexion. I understand it is a very basic configuration but I would like to be sure not to make any mistake. Thanks a lot in advance. Antoine Here is my ruleset: #!/bin/sh # Firewall Command fwcmd="/sbin/ipfw" # Flush out the list before we begin. ${fwcmd} -f flush # Stop spoofing ${fwcmd} add deny all from 192.168.0.0:255.255.255.0 to any in via tun0 ### ${fwcmd} add deny all from ${outside_net}:${outside_mask} to any in via vr0 ### Disabled --> dynamic @ip # Stop RFC1918 n...

Hi there, Is there some way to configure ipfw to do traffic normalizing ("scrubbing", as in ipf for OpenBSD)? Is there any tool to do it for FreeBSD firewalling? I've heard that ipf was ported on current, anything else? TIA, /Dorin. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools

Hi There, I've been having an issue trying to figure out a way to policy route outbound packets from a multihomed machine through the proper interface using IPFW to no avail. I've tried several different incantations of IPFW fwd/forward statements, and none of them seem to do the trick. Basically, I have a host that has multiple Internet connections. This host is running FreeBSD 4.9

Hi. We just opened a gaming center and have chosen to run a FreeBsd box for our firewall. IPFW is configured at it's very basic running natd through rl0 and allowing any to any connections from the lan to the outer world. Natd controls access to the lan. We have a 6.0 mb/s ADSL net connection for all the gaming clients to use, however if a gamer starts downloading a file, that file

I am trying to limit outgoing SMTP traffic to about 14 Mbps and these are the IPFW rules I am using. ${fwcmd} add pipe 1 tcp from 192.168.0.0/24 to any 25 out via dc0 ${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 14Mbit/s I've tried multiple tweaks to the pipe rule and I seem to be missing something. I only get about half the bandwidth I specify. Is this normal behavior? Is there something wrong with the rule...

The man page gives this example, however, when I attempt to use it, it seems to block the whole set? Could someone tell me what's going wrong here please. Thanks heaps.. This works, ${fwcmd} add deny log all from any to 203.1.96.1 in via ${oif} This blocks the whole IP block, not just the list? ${fwcmd} add deny log all from any to 203.1.96.0/24{2,6-25,27-154,156-19 9,204-254} in via ${oif} the man page bit... list: {num | num-num}[,list] Matches all add...

...ars I assumed the few sites I had difficulty with were cases pppoed MTU != 1500, from not having installed tcpmssd on my 4.*-RELEASE, but then running 6.1-RELEASE I realised that wasn't the problem. http://www.web.de Still failed, & http://www.sueddeutsche.de Was slow. I tried adding ${fwcmd} add pass tcp from any to any established from src/etc/rc.firewall case - simple. Which solved it. But I was scared, not undertstand what the established bit did, & how easily an attacker might fake something, etc. I found adding these tighter rules instead worked for me ${fwcmd} tcp from any...

...value is not specified, it defaults to 0. An entry can be added to a table (add), removed from a table (delete), a table can be examined (list) or flushed (flush). Internally, each table is stored in a Radix tree, the same way as the routing table (see route(4)). , and here is an example: ${fwcmd} table 0 add 82.77.156.42 ${fwcmd} add deny all from table\(0\) to any via ${oif} ${fwcmd} add deny all from any to table\(0\) via ${oif} # I know, second rule, .... it's paranoic To set the table you could use a file /etc/badboys and a short shell script executed before the table denying rule...

...** Network Security ** - Web users shouldn't be able to connect to reserved local ports apart from 25(smtp); 80(http); 443(https) and 3306(MySQL) Solution: run the web server and web users shell in a jail, use ipfw to limit the jail access to localhost Those are the rules I have set: ${fwcmd} add 60 pass ip from any to any dst-port 25 jail 1 via lo0 ${fwcmd} add 61 pass ip from any to any dst-port 80 jail 1 via lo0 ${fwcmd} add 62 pass ip from any to any dst-port 443 jail 1 via lo0 ${fwcmd} add 63 pass ip from any to any dst-port 3306 jail 1 via lo0 ${fwcmd} add 80 deny ip from...

...--------------------- If we have such wonderful code inside freeBSD kernel, do we really need to duplicate in default rc.firewall: ;------------------------------------------- setup_loopback () { ############ # Only in rare cases do you want to change these rules # ${fwcmd} add 100 pass all from any to any via lo0 ${fwcmd} add 200 deny all from any to 127.0.0.0/8 ${fwcmd} add 300 deny ip from 127.0.0.0/8 to any } ;------------------------------------------- I think that they are talking about the same thing, no? Best Regards. ;----------------------...

...ith accessing a HTTPd (Apache) jail locally. Consider this jail scenario: /etc/hosts: 127.0.0.1 localhost foo.com 172.16.0.1 apache /etc/natd.conf: use_sockets yes same_ports yes unregistered_only yes redirect_port tcp 172.16.0.1:80 80 redirect_port tcp 172.16.0.1:443 443 /etc/firewall.sh ... ${fwcmd} add divert natd all from any to any via ${oif}(IPFW) ... rl0, my external net inferface, is aliased to 172.16.0.1. Apache 1.3 is installed in /usr/jail/httpd. There are <VirtualHost> directives for 5 different hosts, one of them is foo.com. The problem is created by the fact that the hos...

The man page gives this example, however, when I attempt to use it, it ssems to block the whole set? Could someone tell me what's going wrong here please. Thanks heaps.. This works, ${fwcmd} add deny log all from any to 203.1.96.1 in via ${oif} This blocks the whole IP block, not just the list? ${fwcmd} add deny log all from any to 203.1.96.0/24{2,6-25,27-154,156-19 9,204-254} in via ${oif} the man page bit... list: {num | num-num}[,list] Matches all add...

...as their web address, as I'm using my own DNS etc. So, in rc.firewall, what do I put in place so that everything can see my webserver on the inside interface, and also, the workstations on the inside network can see the internet... This works fine: # Allow access to our WWW ${fwcmd} add pass tcp from any to any 80 setup However, at the end of rc.firewall, I have to have this in place or I can't get access to the outside world... ${fwcmd} add 65000 pass all from any to any ;; I'm getting lost in the trees, and can't see the forest now. Any help...

I'm not a master of the internet RFCs, but I do believe icmp messages have different types. Now to enable traceroute for IPFW, I might put in a rule like this: ipfw add pass icmp from any to me However, how would I make a rule to limit icmp messages to just those used by traceroute? Can the messages be distinguished as such? A dynamic rule that exists only for the duration of a traceroute

Hi peeps, After compiling ipfw into the new 6.2 kernel, and typing "ipfw list", all I get is: "65535 deny ip from any to any" From reading the docs, this might indicate that this is the default rule. (I am certainly protected this way--but can't be very productive ;^) ) By the way, when I run "man ipfw" I get nothing. Using this instead:

...Looks like you're allowing http/https setup packets in > (ie, >>into the firewall) but not letting them out (of the firewall, to the >>webserver). For example in the 'simple' ruleset mentioned, we have: >> >> # Allow access to our WWW >> ${fwcmd} add pass tcp from any to ${oip} 80 setup >> >> # Reject&Log all setup of incoming connections from the > outside >> ${fwcmd} add deny log tcp from any to any in via ${oif} setup >> >> # Allow setup of any other TCP connection >>...

Dear W.D. Do you understand that by adding the rules into kernel space numbered from zero to sixty five thousand five hundred thirty four you may alter the behavior of the rule number sixty five thousand five hundred thirty five can you please define and list the goals you are trying to achieve by altering default rule in the terms you can both explain and understand. ----- Original Message

Well, after working through the various options it looked like MPD would be my best bet here. I've got it sort of working, but there's obviously some tweaky I'm missing here. Recap of the scenario: Full class C of static IPs segmented into 3 networks. Outside, DMZ, Inside. Trying to get remote Windows users through securely to the Inside. Remote users have dynamic IPs.

We're being ping-flooded by the Nachi worm, which probes subnets for systems to attack by sending 92-byte ping packets. Unfortunately, IPFW doesn't seem to have the ability to filter packets by length. Assuming that I stick with IPFW, what's the best way to stem the tide? --Brett Glass