similar to: Squid as a transparent proxy

Are shorewall-shell and shorewall-common required at compile time even if one only wishes to use shorewall-perl (4.0.9)? ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

Hi All, I''m using the Mandrake Linux MultiNetwork Firewall which is a web based interface to the shorewall firewall. I have an internal ip address of 172.25.38.1 which I am try to nat to a public address so that the client pc can ftp to the internet I have add the following in the nat file: 168.10.10.1 eth3 172.25.38.1 No No And this to rules: ACCEPT lan:172.25.38.1 wan tcp

Does anyone know of a script that can act as a "helper" for Shorewall''s dynamic blacklist capabilities? Briefly said, I''d like to know if someone already wrote a script/program that, e.g., parses log files (/var/log/messages, etc) and picks up for example all IP addresses that failed SSH login more than X times and then executes a command such as shorewall drop

I''m new to openvpn and maybe I should be asking on openvpn''s list... But I read the tutorial: http://www.shorewall.net/OPENVPN.html#id2452626 and saw the following: " On System A: ifconfig 192.168.99.1 192.168.99.2 " I don''t understand the reason for using these "virual" IPs. For instance, I configured openvpn on my peers so that the IPs on the

I have a debian woody machine acting as a firewall for a small network. I am trying to do a simple DNAT to port 80 on the protected webserver and masquerade all traffic from the protect subnet outbound. After having read the FAQ and various posts regarding problems with DNAT I''m afraid I''m no closer to a solution. Based on the output from "shorewall show nat" I

Mike Lander wrote: > I am building a shorewall box that the last post has the SSH error and > wanted > some feedback from the list if possible. At first I thought the two ISP''s > I > building this > for had two T-1''s with FQ ip''s as it. I have the box built for this ready > to > go. > Now I find out that one of the T-1''s is

In my peculiar setup I need my shorewall router to do one-to-one NAT with RFC1918 addresses. The "external" addresses are 10.215.0.0 and the internal addresses are 192.168.0.0. I can ping, vnc, http, smb from 10.215.144.48 to 10.215.145.237 which is 192.168.44.237 internally. >From 192.168.44.237 I can do http, rdp, ping to 10.215.0.0 hosts. So all seems fine except for the fact

Hello, > My server is on Mandrake 10.1 off. > eth0 is WAN with static IP connected 512 DSL > eth1 is LAN. I am little confused about NAT. I have a static IP from ISP I want to do a NAT on eth0. What should I use in shorewall masquerading or static nat ? Thanks Varun

Hello Everyone! I am using shorewall-3.0.5 on suse linux. Recently we have implemented dansguardian running on 8080 and squid on port 3128. Previously (before dans guardian) masquerading was working fine but after the implementation of dansguardian masquerading is not working. My rules file has entry Previous entry was ACCEPT loc:192.192.192.3 net REDIRECT loc 8080 tcp

Hello All, I have installed Shorewall 2.0.7 and configured , I am using masq to share internet for users. I have problem of perticular sites . I blocked site IP address. and succeeded but i have problem of Public proxy addresses , some user use anonymous proxy Ip and get thru it and use blocked sites. I blocked Public proxy adresses but it lot of them( I mean more than one public proxy

Hi, I''m trying to block Windows Messenger by Shorewall 1.4.10b, but I]m don´t have success. If the rules below, all access are blocked /etc/shorewall/rules # Windows Messenger Rules REJECT:info loc net tcp 1863 REJECT:info fw net tcp 1863 But if use the rules below, any access are allowed, why ???? /etc/shorewall/rules # Windows

Hello, I''m reading this guide on ipv6 (really just getting my "feet wet"): http://www.shorewall.net/6to4.htm In the section "Configuring IPv6 using my script" I can read that the IPv6 interfaces are: INTERFACES="eth2 eth4" and that correlates fine with the first diagram/figure. However, further down I read "You will notice that sit1, eth0 and eth2

>If you > >a) Have the correct REDIRECT rule (which you do); and >b) Are accepting $FW->Net HTTP traffic (which you are -- at least with your >policy); and >c) DNS works from your firewall (I assume it does since you are wide open >from $FW->Net); then >The problem is in your Squid configuration (this is true in %90 of the >reports on this list where Squid

Dear All, Linux Kernel 2.4.20-8 Running Shorewall 2.2.0 ip addr show 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 link/ether 00:48:54:53:82:45 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 62.68.254.178/28 brd

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, Currently at work we use a commercial product called "Gnatbox", which, I believe, is a BSD derivative running on a floppy disk. They have a pretty UI and all, but I''d feel much safer/happier with a GNU/Linux box and Shorewall doing the same thing. In fact, I''m doing something very close to this at home using Openwrt and Shorewall on my WRT54G router, but I

We are trying to configure shorewall as follows: 1. We have shorewall running at gateway (172.16.1.1) with NAT. 2. We have a number of web servers (172.16.1.x/24). These web servers are accessed through port forwarding at the gateway (172.16.1.1) and websites are visible through virtual hosting through a web re-director. 3. Presently the proxy server runs in a transparent mode, i.e., all web

Hi - I have shorewall-1.3.8-1 on a RH 7.3 machine that acts as a firewall for my network. It was running the other day just fine, but today I have problems getting to the firewall. It is a frame-relay network with Cisco routers. Everything is 192.168.x.x / 24. I can''t ping the firewall from the WAN, but can from the main LAN. Sounds like a routing issue to me, but it was working for

I have allowed ALL of the local users to ping the internet but they currently get the following error and cannot access the internet ! I know it is something I have done wrong (I think it is a routing problem but just cannot find out what) The error is:- Reply from 212.219.13.74: destination host unreachable. My eth1 is 10.0.0.1 and the users can ping that OK My eth0 is 212.219.13.74 (connected