similar to: IPSec Racoon and Port Forwarding

? 2007-3-15???8:00?freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org ??? > Send freebsd-security mailing list submissions to > freebsd-security@freebsd.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org

I am trying to get a tunnel from a cisco 1760 with IOS 12.2.15.t13 to a freebsd 4.9 install with racoon. I have package version freebsd-20040408a and internal version 20001216 in my log file. I posted the full racoon and cisco log below my configs. Racoon keeps saying: 2004-07-26 16:24:03: DEBUG: isakmp.c:2295:isakmp_printpacket(): begin. 2004-07-26 16:24:03: DEBUG:

On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 09:47:05 -0800, "Sam Leffler" <sam@errno.com> said: > >> Add a new config option IPSEC_FILTERGIF to control whether or not >> packets coming out of a GIF tunnel are re-processed by ipfw, >> et. al. By default they are not reprocessed. With the option they >> are. > > This may affect your ipfw/ipf rules. If you are happy with

I have no idea whatsoever as to why racoon/IKE does not work here. I've tried various how-to documents but found nothing that works for me. Gateway (10.0.0.1) running 4.9-stable. Laptop (10.0.0.10) running 5.2.1-release. Both running racoon-20040408a On the gateway 10.0.0.1 # cat /etc/ipsec.conf add 10.0.0.1 10.0.0.10 esp 691 -E rijndael-cbc "1234567890123456" -A hmac-sha1

Hi, while testing racoon on Linux (based on the ported ipsec-tools) the following issue appeared: Racoon did not verify the RSA Signatures during Phase 1 in either main or aggressive mode. Authentication was possible using a correct certificate and a wrong private key. I have verified the below problem using racoon-20030711 on FreeBSD 4.9. I will test it using the SNAP Kit but suspect it to be

Hi all, Somebody can explains me how can I configure ipsec-tools package to use private virtual ip address as an openswan does or some doc/howto about it?? I have seen this howto, but doesn't works for me: http://www.howtoforge.com/racoon_roadwarrior_vpn Many thanks. -- CL Martinez carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com

As was accidently posted here earlier by Ralf :-), you should be aware of this issue: http://vuxml.freebsd.org/d8769838-8814-11d8-90d1-0020ed76ef5a.html racoon fails to verify signature during Phase 1 Affected packages racoon < 20040407b Details VuXML ID d8769838-8814-11d8-90d1-0020ed76ef5a Discovery 2004-04-05 Entry 2004-04-07 Ralf Spenneberg discovered a serious

SuSE10.2 Linux Kernel 2.6.18 Patched, Whenever I try to establish a connection raccoon fails giving the following error. Raccoon config ################# remote 67.101.176.*** { exchange_mode main,aggressive; doi ipsec_doi; situation identity_only; my_identifier address; send_cr off; send_cert off; lifetime time 2 min;

There is an update to ipsec-tools for CentOS 3.1 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2004-165.html refers. Updated files are :- updates/i386/RPMS/ipsec-tools-0.2.5-0.4.i386.rpm updates/i386/SRPMS/ipsec-tools-0.2.5-0.4.src.rpm which is also dependant on :- updates/i386/RPMS/initscripts-7.31.13.EL-1.centos.1.i386.rpm updates/i386/SRPMS/initscripts-7.31.13.EL-1.centos.1.src.rpm These are

Hi All, I''m trying to setup a VPN Between a Linux Box (CentOS 4) and Check Point FW-1 (NGX R65) and I actually already done this. However I''m having a problem with Policy "none" when using ports, for example, I want to exclude from VPN the "ssh" service, so my commands to setkey was. # Excluded services ssh spdadd 172.20.0.0/16[any] 172.16.0.0/16[22] tcp -P

Hi Running racoon on a Freebsd-4.11 machine gives a kernel panic. I am using the racoon from ports directory which comes with the freebsd installation. Steps followed are as shown below: racoon -f /usr/local/etc/racoon/raccon.conf setkey -f ipsec.conf ping -c 1 <ip_of_the_other_gw> The ping will lead into a crash. The crash dump looks like for th ping packet it

I have tested cisco vpn software,found build the phase ONE successfully,but phase two can't build up. Anyone have advice??

Hello Greg, I am writing you, because I saw your responses to a couple of messages on the freebsd-security mailing list related to freebsd vpn and nat. My situations is rather unique, and I am needing an expert's eyes to glance at it and confirm whether it is doable or not. I have a simple diagram that illustrates what I am trying to do, and it is located here (about 40k):

I am attempting to create an ipsec tunnel between two CentOS 5.1 systems, network-to-network with two different 192.168.xxx.0/24 LAN segments. I have gone through the documentation on the centos web site, and have the machines to the point where the /var/log/messages show ``IPsec-SA established'' on both machines after runnig ``ifup ipsec0'' (same ipsec0 on each machine). IP

Hi everyone, I wrote up a post on the FreeBSD forums about the issue I am having. It's rather long so I am providing a link to it here: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=39595 In summary, it seems that when the packets are routed in to the gateway from local network hosts, the src and dst addresses are changed to the public IPs of the tunnel -- at least from the perspective of the

Hi All, In the previous mail, I have sent is only the problem that occurs, because of using IPv6 addresses. But the connection works with IPv4 addresses without any problem. Thanx, Mohan. __________________________________________________________ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your friends 'n family snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://in.photos.yahoo.com

I am having problems in the implementation of a VPN, below made a project of my net: INTRANET (10.0.0.0/24) | 10.0.0.5 xl0 NetBSD IPNAT ( map wi0 10.0.0.0/24 -> 192.168.213.10 ) wi0 192.168.213.10/30 | | Wireless VPN | | 192.168.213.9/30 xl2 FreeBSD NATD ( divert natd all from any to any ) xl0 200.x.x.5/24 | 200.x.x.1/24

Hello, My name is Fermín Galán and I''m currently working with IPSec tunnels. Recently, I was setting a IPSec tunnelling sample scenario (maybe the simplest one :), where I observed some strange behaviour that I like to describe in the list, just in the case somebody knows what can be the cause, please. The scenario involves four hosts configured in the following way:

Hello, I''m trying to put 3 nodes in a vpn in tunnel mode. When I run setkey on the following file, I end up with The result of line 33: File exists. That error isn''t overly helpful, so I was hoping that someone could explain the issue. Here''s the file, with line 33 highlighted. Help appreciated. Mike # Flush the SAD and SPD flush; spdflush; # Add SA for

hello i am trying to set up ipsec in my network, for now just between two hosts, using to use AH & ESP in tunnel mode to get all of packet encrypted. keys are negotiated with racoon. mayby using tunnel mode in this case can seems strange, but i know what i am doing. after setting up everything i have done few tests with ping & tcpdump. but the results are very suprising. bellow is what i