Unfortunately, I am facing some problems....even with my INPUT rules allowing just some subnetworks, Docker is accepting connections from everywhere.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Rad Gruchalski <ra...@gruchalski.com> wrote: > I actually found the complete thing you need. Here we go: > > *nat > … > > :DOCKER - [0:0] > -A PREROUTING -m addrtype --dst-type LOCAL -j DOCKER > -A OUTPUT ! -d 127.0.0.0/8 -m addrtype --dst-type LOCAL -j DOCKER > -A POSTROUTING -s 172.17.0.0/16 ! -o docker0 -j MASQUERADE > # This is where the docker NAT rules go > > # NAT chains > > COMMIT > > *filter > … > :DOCKER - [0:0] > > … > > -A FORWARD -o docker0 -j DOCKER > -A FORWARD -o docker0 -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT > -A FORWARD -i docker0 ! -o docker0 -j ACCEPT > -A FORWARD -i docker0 -o docker0 -j ACCEPT > > This gives you everything you need. Thanks to Avinash for pointing this > out. > > Best regards, > Radek Gruchalski > ra...@gruchalski.com <ra...@gruchalski.com> > de.linkedin.com/in/radgruchalski/ > > > *Confidentiality:*This communication is intended for the above-named > person and may be confidential and/or legally privileged. > If it has come to you in error you must take no action based on it, nor > must you copy or show it to anyone; please delete/destroy and inform the > sender immediately. > > On Wednesday, 13 April 2016 at 21:59, Alfredo Carneiro wrote: > > Oh man! Really thanks! It worked! > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Rad Gruchalski <ra...@gruchalski.com> > wrote: > > Have you tried restarting docker daemon afterwards? > > Best regards, > Radek Gruchalski > ra...@gruchalski.com <ra...@gruchalski.com> > de.linkedin.com/in/radgruchalski/ > > > *Confidentiality:*This communication is intended for the above-named > person and may be confidential and/or legally privileged. > If it has come to you in error you must take no action based on it, nor > must you copy or show it to anyone; please delete/destroy and inform the > sender immediately. > > On Wednesday, 13 April 2016 at 21:53, Alfredo Carneiro wrote: > > Hey Rad, > > Thanks for your answer! I have added theses lines and now looks very > similar before. > > *iptables -N DOCKER* > *iptables -A FORWARD -o docker0 -j DOCKER* > *iptables -A FORWARD -o docker0 -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED > -j ACCEPT* > *iptables -A FORWARD -i docker0 ! -o docker0 -j ACCEPT* > *iptables -A FORWARD -i docker0 -o docker0 -j ACCEPT* > > However, I am still getting errors. > > *docker: Error response from daemon: failed to create endpoint > cranky_kilby on network bridge: iptables failed: iptables --wait -t nat -A > DOCKER -p tcp -d 0/0 --dport 8080 -j DNAT --to-destination 172.17.0.2:8080 > <http://172.17.0.2:8080> ! -i docker0: iptables: No chain/target/match by > that name.* > * (exit status 1).* > > This is my iptables -L output: > > *Chain FORWARD (policy DROP)* > *target prot opt source destination * > *DOCKER all -- anywhere anywhere * > *ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere ctstate > RELATED,ESTABLISHED* > *ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere * > *ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere * > > *Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)* > *target prot opt source destination * > *ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere * > > *Chain DOCKER (1 references)* > *target prot opt source destination* > > I hid the INPUT chain because is very big! > > Best Regards, > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Rad Gruchalski <ra...@gruchalski.com> > wrote: > > Hi Alfredo, > > The only thing you need is: > > -A FORWARD -o docker0 -j DOCKER > -A FORWARD -o docker0 -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT > -A FORWARD -i docker0 ! -o docker0 -j ACCEPT > -A FORWARD -i docker0 -o docker0 -j ACCEPT > > Best regards, > Radek Gruchalski > ra...@gruchalski.com <ra...@gruchalski.com> > de.linkedin.com/in/radgruchalski/ > > > *Confidentiality:*This communication is intended for the above-named > person and may be confidential and/or legally privileged. > If it has come to you in error you must take no action based on it, nor > must you copy or show it to anyone; please delete/destroy and inform the > sender immediately. > > On Wednesday, 13 April 2016 at 21:27, Alfredo Carneiro wrote: > > Hello guys, > > I don't know if that is the right place to ask. So, since we use public > cloud, we are trying to hardening our servers allowing traffic just from > our subnetworks. However, when I tried to implement some iptables rules I > got problems with Docker, which couldn't find its chain anymore. > > Then, I am wondering if anyone has ever implemented any iptables rule in > this scenario. > > I've seen this[1] "tip", however, I think that it is not apply to this > case, because it is very "static". > > [1] - https://fralef.me/docker-and-iptables.html > > Best Regards, > > -- > Alfredo Miranda > > > > > > -- > Alfredo Miranda > > > > > > -- > Alfredo Miranda > > > -- Alfredo Miranda
