similar to: Fixing to bite the dust?

I've been seeing this kind of crap now for some time, and only in the past couple of weeks did I realize I was using the Plus Kernel instead of the normal stock kernel. Could this have something to do with it? Messages also appear mentioning something about a PowerNow K-8, which I thought was something you'd see from an AMD processor, not a quad core intel 64 bit box. Any insight

Here's the output: Feb 9 15:51:26 SSI001 kernel: SFW2-INext-ACC-TCP IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:0f:ea:73:88:12:00:40:2b:67:5b:a7:08:00 SRC=192.168.1.54 DST=192.168.1.2 LEN=48 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=128 ID=51248 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=1964 DPT=139 WINDOW=65535 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 OPT (020405B401010402) Feb 9 15:51:28 SSI001 kernel: SFW2-INext-ACC-TCP IN=eth0 OUT=

Hi all, I''m tring to isolate P2P traffic, specifically BitTorrent, for my QoS scripts. I can''t seem to completely isolate ALL BitTorrent traffic. I identify & mark packets and then use tc filters to put them into appropriate classes. My firewall rules (below) do the markings. My VoIP boxes'' and ICMP traffic get highest priority (mark 1). Then comes DNS, SSH,

I can see, that theres a program that keeps sending packets on port 25: Dec 27 14:11:46 a kernel: [ 6336.992320] O_D_LOG: IN= OUT=lo SRC=127.0.0.1 DST=127.0.0.1 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=61533 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=37263 DPT=25 WINDOW=32792 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Dec 27 14:12:01 a kernel: [ 6352.635704] O_D_LOG: IN= OUT=lo SRC=127.0.0.1 DST=127.0.0.1 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=55853

Hi, I'm experiencing the most perplexing problem with iptables on CentOS 5.2. I'm hoping someone can point out what I must be missing here. I have memcached set up on several nodes on an internal network. I have the following rules set up to allow traffic between memcached nodes: IPTABLES -A INPUT -i bond0 -p tcp -m tcp -s 192.168.1.0/24 -d 192.168.1.0/24 --dport 11211 -j ACCEPT

Hi! Before anything, here is my hardware/software informations : Hardware : -IBM x345, 1 CPU, 1G RAM, IBM ServeRAID controlle -6 HD used with LVM, 2 volume group, 12 logical volumes all running ext3 Software : -RedHat Linux Enterprise AS (Academic) 3.0 update 1 -Kernel 2.4.21-4.0.2.EL -samba-3.0.2-6.3E -Running an apache 2 web server -On normal use, there is only 10-15 computers

I have the problem when my localnetwork do telnet to the net Shorewall:FORWARD:REJECT:IN=eth0 OUT=eth2 my files are the following: policy #SOURCE DEST POLICY LOG LEVEL LIMIT:BURST loc net CONTINUE info loc fw ACCEPT info loc loc ACCEPT loc dmz ACCEPT info fw

Here is the ufw.log after enabling logging medium and trying to connect to the windows net. Unfortunately the web Microsoft page is in German. I think it says window uses smb1 syntax. Jan 27 15:11:09 martin-RB042AV-ABA-a1410y kernel: [ 887.241685] [UFW BLOCK] IN=enp2s5 OUT= MAC=00:19:21:a2:11:5e:74:27:ea:ab:1e:e0:08:00 SRC=192.168.254.15 DST=192.168.254.39 LEN=90 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=128

Hai,   Just a questions, this might be a bug, might not, but for this one i need some help.   Setup, debian 9.   Member server samba 4.9.3 AD DC servers samba 4.8.7   Im setting up the member with a very tight firewall, so nothing in/our/routed unless its defined. Im using UFW firewall for it.   I notice the following in my member its firewall logs, and this only happend when i run : id or

Rowland, Thank you for all your help, I agree that this is not a Samba issue. Given rhat it works without the firewall. It' either a ufw or Windows 8.1 issue. Louis, Applied the rules you suggested to ufw exactly as written. No change. Still cannot connect with firewall enabled. Same error mesage as before "Cannot mount location ...". ufw log set to medium and copied below.

Hey First, apologies if this went out twice. I sent the original email from an odd email configuration (essentially from an alias of what I signed up as). I searched and noticed that my post did not appear and I did not get a bounce back so I was confused. I waited a few days before resending. So apologies if this goes out twice. I am not trying to spam. I was hoping someone could help me with

At the current time I am not subscribed to the mailing list. I have a blacklist that I got from www.peerguardian.net that is rather large ( 81 kb). When shorewall start command is issued it takes about 20 mins for it to load. Is this normal or should I do this another way? Also I noticed something very strange with shorewall .. I have cron do a shorewall restart command every 24 hours and

My dcgui-qt (chat/file-sharing program) doesn''t work and I''m pretty sure it''s my firewall settings. dcgui-qt is a direct connect (file sharing & chat) client. According to the FAQ here (http://dcplusplus.sourceforge.net/faq/faq.php) all I should need to do is: ------- #ACTION SOURCE DEST PROTO DEST SOURCE ORIGINAL #

Hallo, i have a problem to configure shorewall to enable scanning over the network with sane. The scanner is located at the firewall hosts local interface. Why do i get a "all2all" message and not "loc2loc" Aug 25 14:55:26 router saned[26946]: saned from sane-backends 1.0.11 ready Aug 25 14:55:26 router saned[26946]: check_host: access by remote host: 192.168.0.250 Aug

I have a gentoo 2.6.14 box with 4 nics, LAN/DMZ/PUB1/PUB2 LAN and DMZ have a 1918 /22 each, PUB1 and PUB2 have a /29 each of which 5 ips are assigned. Using the mangle table, I give all packets a mark (according to local policies) in the range 1-10. Using ip rule, i pass marks 1-5 through the pub1 route table, and marks 6-10 through the pub2 routing table. Using the nat table, I SNAT to one

(anonymous post) I have a simple 2 interface firewall setup and all is good, almost. I am hosting virtual websites and DNS behind shorewall no problem. However I am trying to use SFTP via a different port number and have no luck even though Putty works well. Is there anything weird to sftp and shorewall? My lab uses a different firewall (firestarter) and it works OK. I am using; DNAT net

Louis, Tried the rules you suggested: These work. I think that rules out any Windows problems. ufw insert 1 allow in on enp2s5 from 192.168.254.15 to 192.168.254.39 ufw insert 2 allow in on enp2s5 from 192.168.254.39 to 192.168.254.15 These do not work. ufw insert 1 allow in on enp2s5 proto tcp from 192.168.254.0/24 to 192.168.254.39 port 139,445 ufw insert 2 allow in on enp2s5 proto udp from

I have problem getting answer on http request from all my local subnets but not from local subnet. Ping and requests on ports 21 22 23 25 110 works fine. I logged port 80 in rules files and I got accept entry same for local subnet and other subnets. Local subnet is 192.168.6 Dec 29 09:52:40 zinfsrv2 kernel: Shorewall:loc2fw:ACCEPT:IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:09:6b:07:ca:cc:00:10:b5:fa:bd:71:08:00

Hi, I have a proxy/firewall, I want to dnat requests for 193.205.140.106 on port 443 towards 10.2.15.23 and requests for 193.205.140.106 on ports 4330 and 3389 towards 10.2.15.25, these rules must apply from internet, loc and fw (some client use a proxy on fw to reach these servers) I have tried with the following rules: DNAT net dmz:10.2.15.23 tcp 443 -

I must have something configured wrong somewhere. I''ve enabled proxy-arp on my shorewall 2.0.7 firewall. Works fine for what its supposed to do, I can see all the machines through it great. However, whenever its enabled, the network on the DMZ goes screwy. I''ve narrowed it down to this: when proxy arp is enabled for that interface, like such: echo 1 >