Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:25:42 -0700
From:      James Earl <jearl@telus.net>
To:        Rishi Chopra <rchopra@cal.berkeley.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Port Forwarding
Message-ID:  <1074795942.57363.79.camel@work>
In-Reply-To: <400FBA0B.5010606@cal.berkeley.edu>
References:  <400C44D8.6010408@cal.berkeley.edu> <1074547363.889.16.camel@work>  <400CA94F.2040807@cal.berkeley.edu> <1074618156.8101.21.camel@work>  <400FBA0B.5010606@cal.berkeley.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If the variables for the 'SIMPLE' rules are setup properly, 'SIMPLE'
should be no different than using 'OPEN' from your win2k's perspective. 
This is assuming you don't have a broken rc.firewall file.

Looking at your original post, your sample was missing the 'onet'
variable.

# set these to your outside interface network and netmask and ip
oif="rl0"
onet="???.???.???.???"
omask="255.255.255.0"  <-- make sure this is right!!!
oip="me"

# set these to your inside interface network and netmask and ip
iif="rl1"
inet="192.168.0.1"
imask="255.255.255.0"
iip="192.168.0.1"

Also, you shouldn't be using IPFIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT in your kernel
configuration.  I use:

options         IPFIREWALL
options         IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE
options         IPDIVERT

Also see IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT in the firewall section of the
Handbook.

IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE allows you to get helpfull information in
/var/log/security.  If you are having troubles with connectivity, look
in /var/log/security to see if it shows what's being blocked and by what
rule.

Hope this helps.

James

On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 04:54, Rishi Chopra wrote:
> James,
> 
> I've configured my Win2k box to contact DNS directly, and both Direct 
> Connect and VNC Server are running smoothly (port forwarding is being 
> accomplished (per your suggestion) by natd.conf).
> 
> I've set the firewall type to 'OPEN' (the Win2k client has ZoneAlarm 
> protection of its own); this is truly the only sticking point.  I'm 
> under the impression that selecting 'SIMPLE' rather than 'OPEN' provides 
> an additional layer of protection to the gateway by preventing certain 
> spoofing attacks.  Unfortunately, I seem unable to switch the firewall 
> type without crippling my Win2k box's functionality.  Perhaps I'll give 
> it a go again sometime in the future.
> 
> 
> Here's a copy of the relevant files:
> 
> //natd.conf
> 
> unregistered_only
> interface rl0
> use_sockets
> dynamic
> redirect_port tcp 192.168.0.2:5800 5800
> redirect_port tcp 192.168.0.2:5900 5900
> redirect_port tcp 192.168.0.2:412 412
> redirect_port tcp 192.168.0.2:1412 1412
> punch_fw 2000:50
> 
> //rc.conf
> 
> gateway_enable="YES"
> hostname="usha.dyndns.org"
> ifconfig_rl0="DHCP"
> ifconfig_rl1="inet 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> kern_securelevel_enable="NO"
> firewall_enable="YES"
> firewall_type="OPEN"
> # firewall_type="SIMPLE"
> firewall_quiet="NO"
> natd_enable="YES"
> natd_interface="rl0"
> natd_flags="-f /etc/natd.conf"
> linux_enable="YES"
> sendmail_enable="NO"
> sshd_enable="YES"
> 
> -R




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1074795942.57363.79.camel>