I am using ipfw nat with the following config
ipfw -q nat 1 config if em0
Which TCP and UDP ranges will the NAT choose its alias ports from?
To protect my website on a shared hosting plan, I added this to my .htaccess file:
<Limit GET HEAD POST>
order deny,allow
deny from .ru
deny from .cn
deny from .in
deny from .de
deny from .cz
deny from .kp
deny from .kr
deny from .ng
deny from .pk
# other allows go here -- below is just a sample
allow from 10.10.10.
</Limit>
I ran like that for an entire year without issue.
I have the following ipfw settings on my Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger:
00100 allow ip from any to 123.123.123.123
00110 allow tcp from any to 123.123.123.123
00120 allow udp from any to 123.123.123.123
00130 allow ip from 123.123.123.123 to any
00140 allow tcp from 123.123.123.123 to any
00150 allow udp from 123.123.123.123 to any
65534 deny ip from any to any
65535 allow ip from any to any
I am trying
Hi all,
I am working on a shell script that blocks all incoming and outgoing connections
for 10 hours. After then hours everything will be unblocked again.
i am using the ipfw command and put it to sleep the amount of time in seconds.
Code:
ipfw -q flush
ipfw -f add deny tcp from any to any any keep-state setup
sleep 36000
ipfw -q flush
this works so far, so good.
I prefer ufw to iptables for configuring my software firewall. After reading about this vulnerability also on askubuntu, I decided to block the fixed IP of the control server: 212.7.208.65.
Edit
I have thought that excessive number of "deny" lines are confusing apache into blocking unlisted IPv4 addresses. But comment of @Ladadadada made me pinpoint the exact issue. You can read my old question below.
I got strange problem with ipfw on FreeBSD 8.2, the problem is when I'm trying to flush the ipfw , by the following command:
/sbin/ipfw -q -f flush
or
/sbin/ipfw flush and then y
My dedicated server freezes, and ISP need to hard reboot it.
Could anyone help me?
This should be an easy one, but I am seeing conflicting information from google, and would like some clarification. I am trying to block access to a site to all but 1 IP address.
I am adding Allow, Deny and Order directives to the sites-enabled directory. Which of the following is correct?
Order allow, deny
Allow From <ip>
or
Order deny, allow
Deny From all
Allow From <ip>
I've been using denyhosts for a while and I noticed my /etc/hosts.deny is getting rather large. Denyhosts adds IPs to /etc/hosts.deny, and my denyhosts is configured to never purge IPs.
$ wc -l /etc/hosts.deny
22149 /etc/hosts.deny
Might this become a problem? I don't really understand how libwrap works.