similar to: Newnotsyn Behavior

Hi, I have shorewall version 1.4.10g on Redhat 9 Local clients are on eth1 in subnet 192.168.3.0/24. eth0 is for the outside (over xdsl with includes a ppp0 interface). Nessus (nessusd) is installed *on the firewall* and managed trough nessus (the client or frontend) running on one of the internal machines. When I was running a scan against 194.152.181.36 I observed several entries like

Has anyone encountered a situation where packets dropped by the newnotsyn chain can result in sporadic browsing problems, slowness, and even timeouts? I noticed that of the 3300 hits for newnotsyn in our current log (6 hours worth), over 2700 of them were to/from our proxy servers. And browsing through them, most *appear* to be otherwise valid packets from remote web servers that would have

The first Beta Version is available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://ftp.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta New features include: 1) "shorewall refresh" now reloads the traffic shaping rules (tcrules and tcstart). 2) "shorewall debug [re]start" now turns off debugging after an error occurs. This places the point of the failure near the end of the

Hi, I''m running shorewall-2.0.8-1mdk with iptables-1.2.9-7.1.101mdk on kernel-2.4.22-30mdk, Mandrake 10.1 (kernel-2.6.8.1.10mdk-1-1mdk is installed, but I haven''t rebooted yet). I get a significant number of newnotsyn packet denials from existing, valid connections. Most of these seem to be on port 80 and port 25, and directionality doesn''t seem to matter (I run

Hello, I wonder if someone could use the TPROXY with Shorewall and transparent Squid  with using the routing rules on shorewall (tcrules) for hosts / networks (LAN) with multiples providers (WANs) directly from the internal network on port 80 (with TPROXY transparent squid or REDIRECT). On this issue, the routing rules is not work propertly because the source is the

I am getting the following message when Shorewall stops can anybody shed any light on this message and where I should be looking? Thanks root@bobshost:~# shorewall stop Loading /usr/share/shorewall/functions... Processing /etc/shorewall/params ... Processing /etc/shorewall/shorewall.conf... Loading Modules... Stopping Shorewall...Processing /etc/shorewall/stop ... IP Forwarding Enabled

Hi All, Issue: My Syslog logging doesn''t seem to work for REJECT / DROP policies Context: Shorewall version 1.4.4b on a single IP address setup Diagnosis: Default /etc/shorewall/common.def triggers a DROP prior to policy based -j LOG actions For example selected lines (from the generated iptables) ... The net2all policy: a) -A net2all -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT

This is a minor release of Shorewall. WARNING: This release introduces incompatibilities with prior releases. See http://www.shorewall.net/upgrade_issues.htm. Changes are: a) There is now a new NONE policy specifiable in /etc/shorewall/policy. This policy will cause Shorewall to assume that there will never be any traffic between the source and destination zones. b) Shorewall no longer

Hi, I have a big "name problem" with my internal mail server (10.0.0.152). It is "seen" on the internet through DNAT (213.58.230.27). Also there is a MX record pointing to the machine. Everything works fine from the outside. However i can''t set the mail clients on the lan pointing to the mx record, because this one points to 213.58.230.27 and the firewall

Hi, I''m trying to enable ssh (when that works, want to add:pop3s,smtp,web) from the internet to the firewall but it does not work. I managed to DNAT ftp to a host in the loc network (192.168.0.50) successful but I don''t know why SSH: Does not work for me: ACCEPT net fw tcp 22 Works from the loc network: ACCEPT loc fw tcp 22 I have tried also with (no success): AllowSSH

There has been a low continuing level of confusion over the terms "Source NAT" (SNAT) and "Static NAT". To avoid future confusion, all instances of "Static NAT" have been replaced with "One-to-one NAT" on the web site and in the CVS configuration files (Shorewall/ project). The documentation in 1.4.9 will also contain this change. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \

I have had to replace an existing setup which has a bunch of IPs Proxy-NAT''ed onto the loc segment. While I do eventually want to move them to their own segment, I have to deal with this for the next few weeks. My problem is that from a loc system I can ping the public IP of a system being proxy-ARP''d but I can''t hit it via HTTP. Nothing is being blocked according

This is some of the messages I get: TCP non-syn/non-ack packet on invalid connection. Packet has been dropped TCP Source Port: http(80) TCP Destination Port: 2595 TCP Message Flags: 0x00000019 The TCP message Flags varies. I''ve seen 0x00000011, 0x00000010, 0x00000018, 0x00000004, 0x00000014 and 0x00000019. Intrusion: Invalid TCP Flags TCP Source Port: 6881 TCP Destination Port: 4307

Hi! Shorewall Users May I know ..what does it means ? Nov 5 12:43:34 netgw kernel: Shorewall:newnotsyn:DROP:IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:05:5d:4e:fc:62:00:d0:95:7a:d5:f1:08:00 SRC=210.59.230.239 DST=211.24.146.50 LEN=52 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=48 ID=36787 PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=20291 WINDOW=65160 RES=0x00 ACK FIN URGP=0 Best Regards, Support

Hi, My firewall is a machine running Debian Squeeze with shorewall 4.4.11.6. /etc/shorewall/policy says this: loc $FW ACCEPT loc loc ACCEPT loc net ACCEPT $FW net ACCEPT $FW loc ACCEPT net all DROP # info all all REJECT

I''m attempting to setup Squid as shown on: http://shorewall.sourceforge.net/Shorewall_Squid_Usage.html#DMZ The firewall is a Bering 1.0 firewall running Shorewall 1.3.11, Red Hat 7.2 on the server in the DMZ. I''m not seeing the requests come in to the server using tcpdump. The server is 192.168.2.1 connecting to eth2 on the firewall, the local traffic I''m trying to

Hi, First of all, I know that not dropping SYN/FIN isn't really a big deal, it just makes no sense. But since it doesn't make any sense, I don't see the reason why not to discard them. I'm running pf on FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p3 and I scrub any traffic. I've read some other posts on google and as far as I can tell, clearly invalid packets (like packets with SYN/RST set) is

Hi Guys, I need some help. I''ve been using shorewall for a while now and it''s been running beautifully, but I''m now experiencing some problems. It seems that connections are getting dropped much like the behavior described by the NEWNOTSYN=no option in the shorewall.conf file, but I have NEWNOTSYN=Yes in my file. The messages I see in my logs are things like:

Hi, I have a install of shorewall I have 2 interfaces(I think) ppp0[connection device] and eth0 [LAN device], I want to allow all traffic from the the internet in or aleast port 80 and CVS and webmin and mail and everything normal to the main machine with shorewall on it. I changed to policy file but it just gave me errors as to double interfaces. I also what still to alow connection sharing

Hello! I am using shorewall shorewall-2.0.11-1 on fedora core2 (iptables-1.2.9-95.7). My box has 2 physical nic´s plus one virt. ipsec interface for a freeswan-vpn connection. A few days ago, portsentry spit out a lot of connections from windows clients (port 135, 445). Ooops. I review my shorewall settings but could not find a mistake. So I took a win-client and established a second