similar to: Multiple rate limited networks and transparent http proxy - tricky problem

Hi I have been using Shorewall for a while now and find it very useful and easy to configure, I am learning iptables and having trouble getting the bridge to successfully work with squid, although I get it working with Shorewall straight away? Does anyone know the rules to successfully use squid with a transparent bridge? Internet – router - (bridge eth0 – eth1) – local lan auto lo iface lo

Hi all Could someone please me with my current setup. I just got another DSL line and I have my routing and marking the packets etc so that I can decided the fate as to which ISP I would like to route my traffic out of etc. I managed to get squid to be used as a trasparent proxy, but im forced to use the default gw of the machine and for the likes of my I cant figure out to send traffic out

Hi, I want forward port 21 and 443 to my squid. A simply rule (dnat) didnt help me. My http - port (only 80) will forwarded to my squid. It runs fine. Here I have used the HowTo from Tom and the hints from http://lartc.org/. I want to do the same with port 21 as port 80. My network: Shorewall: eth0 net (192.168.108.1) eth1 dmz (192.168.109.1) eth2 loc (192.168.110.1) eth3 loc1

Hi all, I''m trying to set up a transparent proxy with dansguardian, and running into some strange issues with the squid setup without dansguardian. I have used shorewall for quite some time, and I''m stumped as to why I can''t get this to work. Here is a brief synopsis of my network. loc --> gateway/firewall--> net I have the following policies: #firewall to

I''ve installed a bering box acting as a firewall for a lan; the lan is 192.168.1.0/24 the bering box is 192.168.1.254 I''ve installed a squid server 192.168.1.1 It is possible to configure shorewall for a transparent proxy to the squid server? I''ve tryed with REDIRECT loc loc:192.168.1.1:3128 tcp www - !192.168.1.1 in the rules file I get this error: Error:

hey friends, I am trying to configure Squid Transparent Proxy on Centos4.0. The eth0 is connected to the Internet and eth1 is for the LAN connection I am testing this scenario with 2 machines one machine (Centos4.0 ) on which squid is running and other machine which is debian is on the network 192.168.2.0. Centos4.0 eth0: 192.168.1.125/24 eth1: 192.168.2.126/24 Debian: eth0:

Hi, I just setup a very basic HTTP proxy with Squid on a router running CentOS 7. Up until early 2020 I've been using a bone-headed shell script with iptables to configure my firewall. But I decided to follow advice from a few gurus on this list, and I've since moved my configurations to FirewallD, which works nicely. There's one configuration left to tackle, that's port

hi I have trying to remove the extra rules from my routing tables, however with no luck Also I want to know these duplicate entries have an effect on packets going routed? I have this overwhelming rules lists from my predessor who added the "ip rule add fwmark" entries in firewall script, and on each run of firewall script its creates an extra entry in routing table. Now what I want to

Hi All, I'm lately suffering from Quota abuse at home. believe it or not my teenagers are eating through my allowed quota. Hence, i'm thinking of setting up a centos machine to work as such: HDSL modem(natted to an onboard dhcp service for lan users) -> Centos - > Switch - LAN users Hw specs: 3 GB ram 3.0 core 2 duo 2 X 1 TB HDD 2 X 1 Gb NIC Centos will contain the

Greetings, I installed a squid 3.1.10.i686 squid to a centos 6.2i686. The proxy is working fine with the default config. After I decided to use it as a transparent proxy, I added two lines to config: http_proxy 10.0.5.1:3128 transparent, always_direct allow all http_port 10.0.5.1:3128 transparent # # Recommended minimum configuration: # acl manager proto cache_object #acl localhost src

Hi, Is it possible to transparent proxy FTP through Squid? If so what rules would i need to add to the rules file so that any ftp request is forwarding through Squid? I have www traffic being Tranparantly proxied. Herwith my www rules: REDIRECT loc 3128 tcp 80 ACCEPT loc fw::3128 tcp www - all ACCEPT fw

Hi, I followed the instructions posted on the shorewall web page for transparent proxy, but I still cannot get it to work. I have almost the same setup as described on the web, running squid on dmz, eth1, and the loc on eth2. I can see that packets going out from the fw, they are not sent to the squid proxy, and if I try to telnet to the squid proxy to port 80, where I should be directed to

Hi, I''ve used old ZPH patch under squid 2.4 Stable4 and it works great ! Now I want to patch squid 2.4 stable 5, with new patch, on http://www.it-academy.bg/zph/ I''ve patched and installed squid 2.5 stable 5 succefully, but I can''t get ZPH works. I''m trying with ... $TC class add dev $LANDEV parent 1: classid 1:7 htb rate 1Mbit $TC filter add dev $LANDEV

I remember to see something about that in shorewall.net some time ago, but I could not find it today ... The case : Debian Etch, Shorewall 3.2.6, squid3 and Apache 2 . The first 3 where already running fine for some time ... Now I need to setup an Apache server to allow some web mannagement, things like PHPsysinfo, phppgadmin, just for internal net, no web access . but port 80 is redirected to

Trying to use the policy drop rule with the bridged firewall, when I removed the first line the transparent proxy works great? It seems a bit strange as from reading several articles on it I thought the following occurs. 1st line - if it doest match it gets dropped on the local filter input. 2nd line - redirects the traffic off the link layer into the network layer ready for line 3. 3rd line -

hi thanks for your reply heh "Example: ip del rule pref 32742" is syntically wrong :) and when i tried "ip rule del 32742" it gives me error # ip rule del 32742 Error: argument "32742" is wrong: Failed to parse rule type so how to get get of these extra rules? 0: from all lookup local 32742: from all fwmark 0x2 lookup squid.out 32743: from all fwmark 0x2

Hi folks, So, I have a pretty simple setup - a linux router machine running as a firewall/router for a small neighborhood LAN (approx 20 machines). I also have squid running on the box in non-transparent mode, and also I have set up NAT for TCP/UDP ports above 1024 for all clients and SSH/POP/SMTP/CVS NAT''d for selected ones based on MAC filtering. No hosts whatsoever can access ports 80

Hello ! I have installed and configured squid(last version) transparent proxy and i am using shorewall(last version) as a firewall. I have redirected all of my local network''s http requests to the squid port(3128). But, from my local net i cannot ping a remote machine on the internet using his hostname like google.com. I could do it only when i use a ip address. All of computers in the

Hi all, is it possible configure Shorewall in bridge mode and, in the same box, utilize Squid in transparent mode? I''m triing to do this, but the REDIRECT rule doesn''t work. I''ve already read http://www.shorewall.net/bridge.html to configure the bridge and work fine for me, but when I add the rule for transparent proxy

List Out of interest, I use transparent squid proxies for caching websites, and I shape the clients that browse the net, this all works perfectly so no questions in this regard... CLIENT <--- eth0 ----> SQUID <----- ppp0 -----> NET What I just realised was that all egress traffic on eth0 gets shaped, squid gets data from ppp0 and hence is not shaped. Does this mean that squid