similar to: firewalld configuration for securing SSH

Thank you, I've gone in and made the listed changes changed firewalld sections to use services instead of just port numbers. -- Kimee On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 17:05 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:13 AM Kimberlee Integer Model > <kimee.i.model at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > HI all, > > > > 1st time contributor here. I was using the

I'm not sure I follow, you just think the modified one should be called "ssh-custom", or you think there shouldn't be a modified service file at all? -- Kimee On Fri, 2019-04-26 at 19:46 +0200, Thibaut Perrin wrote: > Hi there, > > Wouldn't that be a better solution to create a custom xml file to put > in /etc/firewalld and load that "ssh-custom"

Ah. I understand now. I was considering roughly the same, but wasn't sure whether that or rich rules was preferable. -- Kimee On Sat, 2019-04-27 at 01:39 +0200, Thibaut Perrin wrote: > No, I think the rules you created might have a better place in a > custom xml file instead of being given to firewall cmd directly :) > > On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 23:01, Kimberlee Integer Model

Thibaut, I did a little more reading, and according to both firewalld.service(5) and firewalld.org the service XML files, can only handle source/destination/port, and cannot handle the actions to be performed. I will update where possible to use the service files, but log/accept limit will still need to be encoded in rich rules. -- Kimee On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 20:43 -0400, Kimberlee Integer Model

No, I think the rules you created might have a better place in a custom xml file instead of being given to firewall cmd directly :) On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 23:01, Kimberlee Integer Model < kimee.i.model at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure I follow, you just think the modified one should be called > "ssh-custom", or you think there shouldn't be a modified service file

Hi there, Wouldn't that be a better solution to create a custom xml file to put in /etc/firewalld and load that "ssh-custom" service instead ? Thanks On 26/04/2019, Kimberlee Integer Model <kimee.i.model at gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you, I've gone in and made the listed changes changed firewalld > sections to use services instead of just port numbers. > > --

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:13 AM Kimberlee Integer Model <kimee.i.model at gmail.com> wrote: > > HI all, > > 1st time contributor here. I was using the guide on securing SSH, and > noticed that the firewall-cmd snippets for filtering by requests per > time seem somewhat outdated. From what I can tell the given snippets, > relay arguments directly down to iptables, and do

Hello, I would like permission to contribute information to the wiki... Username: CaseyDoyle To append an additional method for ssh blocking with firewallD: Page: https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH#head-3579222198adaf43a3ecbdc438ebce74da40d8ec Suggest to add the following info to it pertinent section: ------ 6. Filter SSH at the Firewall complementary to iptables method,

Hi, just a quick note to whoever is maintaining this page: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH The procedure is missing the firewall-cmd calls necessary in EL7: firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp --permanent Also, it may be worth mentioning that semanage is in the policycoreutils-python package, which isn?t installed by default in all stock

Hi, just a quick note to whoever is maintaining this page: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Network/SecuringSSH The procedure is missing the firewall-cmd calls necessary in EL7: firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp firewall-cmd --add-port 2345/tcp --permanent Also, it may be worth mentioning that semanage is in the policycoreutils-python package, which isn?t installed by default in all stock

I tried the following firewall-cmd --add-service=dns --permanent firewall-cmd --add-service=samba --permanent firewall-cmd --reload But was not able to connect until I disabled the iptables via iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -F then I was able to connect my windows 10 pro to my domain. So my question is what services or ports am I missing to open?

Greetings, One of my biggest frustrations with CentOS 7 has been firewalld. Essentially all of the documentation just flat doesn't work. One common thing that needs to be done is to change the zone of an interface, however I've tried: firewall-cmd --permanent --zone=internal --change-interface=ens192 firewall-cmd --permanent --zone=internal --add-interface=ens192 I've also tried

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:50 PM, Marc Muehlfeld <mmuehlfeld at samba.org> wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > Am 13.02.2018 um 05:16 schrieb Jeff Sadowski via samba: >> So my question is what services or ports am I missing to open? > > AD DCs: > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_AD_DC_Port_Usage perfect exactly what I was looking for I found some docs about firewalld that

I just noticed that when rebooting a CentOS 7 server the firewall comes back up with both interfaces set to REJECT, instead of the eth1 interface set to ACCEPT as defined in 'permanent' firewalld configuration files. All servers are up to date. By "just noticed" I mean that I finally investigated why a newly rebooted VM failed to allow NFS connections. Prior to doing that.

Hey all, I'm having a little trouble opening up a port on a C7 machine. Here's the default zone: [root at appd:~] #firewall-cmd --get-default-zone home So I try to add the port: [root at appd:~] #firewall-cmd --zone=home --add-port=8181/tcp success Then I reload firewalld: [root at appd:~] #firewall-cmd --reload success Simple! That should do it. Right? Well not quite. Cuz when

After a recent large update, firewalld's status contains many lines of the form: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables... Checking iptables.service status shows it to be masked. I realize that firewalld uses iptables, but should it be enabled and started as a service? Jon -- Jon H. LaBadie jcu at labadie.us 11226 South Shore Rd. (703) 787-0688 (H)

In there you are almost telling people that security through obscurity is a good way. That might sometimes be true but in this case it could mean that you would be handing passwords and other data out. When you start SSH on port 22 it is done with root privileges because the root user is the only one that can use ports below 1024. Root is the only user that can listen to that port or do

You need to add pop3. Please note that op3 is not secure as password and username is transferred in plain text. *firewall-cmd --add-service=pop3 --permanent* *firewall-cmd --reload--* *Eero* 2016-07-14 11:43 GMT+03:00 Subscriber <ml-lists at agoris.net.ua>: > > Thursday, July 14, 2016, 11:32:31 AM, you wrote: > > > Dear Members, > > > Please tell me how

I am familiar with using commands like: firewall-cmd --permanent --add-service=http To enable firewalld services. I am also aware that this is through xml 'scripts' in: /usr/lib/firewalld/services/ But what I find interesting is what services are there and which are not. I went a'lookin with: grep "port=" /usr/lib/firewalld/services/*|more And found some like:

> -----Original Message----- > From: CentOS [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Gordon > Messmer > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 9:23 PM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] firewalld > > On 01/27/2017 06:01 PM, TE Dukes wrote: > > I telnet localhost 143, I get connection refused. > > > > What zone is used for the local