Re: [CentOS] firewalld - same source in different zones
W dniu pon, 08.02.2021 o godzinie 15∶30 -0500, użytkownik Jonathan Billings napisał: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 06:19:07PM +0100, Łukasz Posadowski wrote: > > > > > > Hi. > > > > I have a little trouble with firewalld. I'm trying to open some > > ports > > for monitoring server, but it's in the same network as "home" zone: > > > > Monitored host (192.168.111.60): > > > > lukasz @ strategie 17:52:19 ~ $ > > -> sudo firewall-cmd --get-active > > home > > sources: 192.168.111.0/24 > > (open ports 22, 80, 443) > > monitoring > > sources: 192.168.111.19 > > (open ports: 5666) > > public > > interfaces: ens18 > > (no open ports) > > > > --- > > > > Monitoring host (192.168.111.19): > > > > lukasz @ potemkin 17:57:25 ~ $ > > -> telnet strategie.ping.local 5666 > > Trying 192.168.111.60... > > telnet: connect to address 192.168.111.60: No route to host > > > > lukasz @ potemkin 17:57:26 ~ $ > > -> telnet strategie.ping.local 80 > > Trying 192.168.111.60... > > Connected to strategie.ping.local. > > Escape character is '^]'. > > ^] > > telnet> Connection closed. > > > > --- > > > > I think there are conflicting rules on a monitored host, that: > > - prevent access to 5666 from 192.168.111.0/24, > > - give access to 5666 from 192.168.111.19 > > and packets from potemkin are routed trough a home zone. > > > > I really would like to have dedicated "monitor" zone. Is there a > > way to > > give "monitor" zone more priority, than "home"? I may end with > > OpenVPN > > on potemkin and use 172.30.25.0/24 for monitoring, but, apart from > > encryption aspect, it seems a little excessive. > > You can do it with rich rules, which have a priority. Basically, if > you set priority to < 0, it goes into a _pre table which gets > evaluated before the other zones: > > Blog about it: > https://firewalld.org/2018/12/rich-rule-priorities > > Unfortunately, this was introduced in firewalld v0.7.0 which isn't in > CentOS 7. I'm not sure if the functionality has been backported, but > the firewalld.richlanguage man page on my c7 system doesn't mention > it. It should work on CentOS 8+. > > Another solution is to set a direct rule, which is evaluated first. > > Lastly, its my experience that firewalld evaluates the configuration > of zones lexically, so if the monitoring zone happens to sort > (LANG=C) > before the other zone, it'll be evaluated first. Don't trust that > this behavior will always be the case. > I'm with Centos 8 (and fedora), so it should work. Thank You, I'll try with rich rules. -- Łukasz Posadowski ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] firewalld - same source in different zones
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 06:19:07PM +0100, Łukasz Posadowski wrote: > > > Hi. > > I have a little trouble with firewalld. I'm trying to open some ports > for monitoring server, but it's in the same network as "home" zone: > > Monitored host (192.168.111.60): > > lukasz @ strategie 17:52:19 ~ $ > -> sudo firewall-cmd --get-active > home > sources: 192.168.111.0/24 > (open ports 22, 80, 443) > monitoring > sources: 192.168.111.19 > (open ports: 5666) > public > interfaces: ens18 > (no open ports) > > --- > > Monitoring host (192.168.111.19): > > lukasz @ potemkin 17:57:25 ~ $ > -> telnet strategie.ping.local 5666 > Trying 192.168.111.60... > telnet: connect to address 192.168.111.60: No route to host > > lukasz @ potemkin 17:57:26 ~ $ > -> telnet strategie.ping.local 80 > Trying 192.168.111.60... > Connected to strategie.ping.local. > Escape character is '^]'. > ^] > telnet> Connection closed. > > --- > > I think there are conflicting rules on a monitored host, that: > - prevent access to 5666 from 192.168.111.0/24, > - give access to 5666 from 192.168.111.19 > and packets from potemkin are routed trough a home zone. > > I really would like to have dedicated "monitor" zone. Is there a way to > give "monitor" zone more priority, than "home"? I may end with OpenVPN > on potemkin and use 172.30.25.0/24 for monitoring, but, apart from > encryption aspect, it seems a little excessive. You can do it with rich rules, which have a priority. Basically, if you set priority to < 0, it goes into a _pre table which gets evaluated before the other zones: Blog about it: https://firewalld.org/2018/12/rich-rule-priorities Unfortunately, this was introduced in firewalld v0.7.0 which isn't in CentOS 7. I'm not sure if the functionality has been backported, but the firewalld.richlanguage man page on my c7 system doesn't mention it. It should work on CentOS 8+. Another solution is to set a direct rule, which is evaluated first. Lastly, its my experience that firewalld evaluates the configuration of zones lexically, so if the monitoring zone happens to sort (LANG=C) before the other zone, it'll be evaluated first. Don't trust that this behavior will always be the case. -- Jonathan Billings ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] firewalld - same source in different zones
Hi. I have a little trouble with firewalld. I'm trying to open some ports for monitoring server, but it's in the same network as "home" zone: Monitored host (192.168.111.60): lukasz @ strategie 17:52:19 ~ $ -> sudo firewall-cmd --get-active home sources: 192.168.111.0/24 (open ports 22, 80, 443) monitoring sources: 192.168.111.19 (open ports: 5666) public interfaces: ens18 (no open ports) --- Monitoring host (192.168.111.19): lukasz @ potemkin 17:57:25 ~ $ -> telnet strategie.ping.local 5666 Trying 192.168.111.60... telnet: connect to address 192.168.111.60: No route to host lukasz @ potemkin 17:57:26 ~ $ -> telnet strategie.ping.local 80 Trying 192.168.111.60... Connected to strategie.ping.local. Escape character is '^]'. ^] telnet> Connection closed. --- I think there are conflicting rules on a monitored host, that: - prevent access to 5666 from 192.168.111.0/24, - give access to 5666 from 192.168.111.19 and packets from potemkin are routed trough a home zone. I really would like to have dedicated "monitor" zone. Is there a way to give "monitor" zone more priority, than "home"? I may end with OpenVPN on potemkin and use 172.30.25.0/24 for monitoring, but, apart from encryption aspect, it seems a little excessive. Thank You. -- Łukasz Posadowski ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
