[olug] How can I sever IPtables established connections for only certain IPs?

Lou Duchez lou at paprikash.com
Sat May 27 12:10:24 CDT 2023


I confess my needs with nftables are pretty simple, so I don't know its 
limitations. The most interesting thing I've done with nftables is get 
it to play nice with Fail2Ban, and that was really just a matter of 
following the instructions and tweaking two things.

Fail2Ban illustrates something nice about nftables though. When you're 
creating your nft firewall, the first thing you do is create a "table", 
which will contain all your various chains of rules. But, why bother 
with a "table" level at all? Is there a situation when there might be 
more than one table?

And, it turns out there is. Fail2ban does its thing by modifying your 
firewall, and in the case of nftables, what it does is create its own 
"table" distinct from yours, so that it doesn't walk all over your 
stuff. For example, here's the table that Fail2ban has built on one of 
my servers:

table ip f2b-table {
         set addr-set-smtppop3imap {
                 type ipv4_addr
                 elements = { 27.150.161.177, 41.207.248.204,
                              45.125.65.37, 45.125.65.159,
                              194.87.151.141, 203.191.241.59,
                              211.110.212.18, 222.211.112.225,
                              222.222.21.184 }
         }

         set addr-set-SSH {
                 type ipv4_addr
                 elements = { 141.98.11.46, 141.98.11.52,
                              141.98.11.53, 141.98.11.54,
                              141.98.11.55, 141.98.11.65,
                              141.98.11.67, 141.98.11.83,
                              141.98.11.84, 141.98.11.86,
                              141.98.11.93, 141.98.11.111,
                              141.98.11.146 }
         }

         chain f2b-chain {
                 type filter hook input priority filter - 1; policy accept;
                 tcp dport { 25, 110, 143 } ip saddr 
@addr-set-smtppop3imap drop
                 tcp dport 22 ip saddr @addr-set-SSH drop
         }
}

So any time Fail2Ban detects a hacker trying to get at me through SMTP / 
IMAP / POP3, it adds their address to the "addr-set-smtppop3imap" set. 
And then Fail2ban interrogates that set when it's trying to decide 
whether to block access to ports 25, 110, and 143. Something similar 
happens with SSH and the "addr-set-SSH" set. But here's my point: this 
is all happening in the table "f2b-table" which was created by Fail2Ban 
and is managed by Fail2Ban. It leaves "my" table completely untouched.

With that in mind, all sorts of utilities should be able to graft their 
rules to nftables, once someone develops the plugins to do so. nftables 
is well-suited to external manipulation.


On 5/27/2023 12:51 PM, Matthew G. Marsh wrote:
>
> I will consider nftables when nftables allows extensions and real 
> firewall modules such as Geo-IP and Accounting to work. When nftables 
> can be extended then maybe it will be ready for production use.
>
> I lean heavily on Geo-IP filtering in the RAW table for firewalls 
> protecting critical data. And I make extensive use of IP Accounting 
> for specific address flows to determine boundary usages for certain 
> servers. There are a few other modules I use along with one I wrote a 
> long time ago for performing certain security functions of my own.
>
> So far in testing nftables it is fine for simple firewalling and 
> filtering structures and very difficult to extend or use with other 
> facilities within the Linux kernel such as WireGuard and the various 
> Tun/TAP devices, especially MAC based.
>
> But I appreciate your mini-tutorial as that will help many people who 
> would like to learn nftables. By the way one of the methods that I use 
> when playing with the config files is to use the Emacs JSON parsing 
> mode engine as it keeps consistency in the bracketing and nesting.
>
> Please keep us posted on your work with nftables going forward as it 
> is good to know what works from a "been dere - done dat" perspective.
>
> mgm
>
> On Tue, 23 May 2023, Lou Duchez wrote:
>
>> Perhaps now's the time to take the plunge with nftables. The sample I 
>> provided is a working sample - I actually ran it on my router to make 
>> sure it works - and other than tweaking IP addresses to your 
>> purposes, it should be ready to go. I think you'd just drop a couple 
>> lines like this in my_filter_forward:
>>
>> ip saddr 192.168.1.240 drop
>> ip daddr 192.168.1.240 drop
>>
>> ... I am noting that there's not even a "conntrack" line in there 
>> because it forwards everything by default, so there's no need to even 
>> check "conntrack". If the default were "drop", that's when the 
>> "conntrack" line would be necessary.
>>
>>
>> On 5/23/2023 1:57 PM, Ben Hollingsworth wrote:
>>> That's a great writeup.
>>>
>>> I've been very fond of the fwbuilder GUI for running IPtables. I 
>>> haven't typed a raw command in years.  The down side is that it has 
>>> no facility for doing what you suggested (moving rules above 
>>> conntrack), so I'll finally have to get my hands dirty again.  That 
>>> shouldn't be too hard, I guess.
>>>
>>> On 5/23/23 12:39, Lou Duchez wrote:
>>>> While I'm in a mood to be expansive, I remember what a hassle it 
>>>> was for me to learn nftables. Here is the writeup that I would have 
>>>> loved to have had back in the day, because I think this makes 
>>>> things simple.
>>>>
>>>> NFTABLES CONCEPTS
>>>>
>>>> nftables operates via nested sections contained between curly 
>>>> brackets.
>>>>
>>>> The highest level section is the "table", and when you define your 
>>>> table, you need to specify the "family" it is to govern ("ip" for 
>>>> IPv4, "ipv6" for IPv6, "inet" for both, etc), plus a name. You can 
>>>> have more than one table for a given family, for your own 
>>>> organizational purposes.
>>>>
>>>> To do NAT and masquerading, you have to use "ip" or "ipv6", but not 
>>>> "inet". So with that in mind, we will do a family of "ip", and our 
>>>> table will start with:
>>>>
>>>> table ip myiptable {
>>>>
>>>> Within a table you can create "chains", which are sets of rules. 
>>>> Additionally you can hook them to specific events; for example, the 
>>>> first line in a chain might read:
>>>>
>>>> type filter hook input priority 0; policy accept;
>>>>
>>>> And that tells you that this chain is to be traversed during the 
>>>> "filter" phase of inbound traffic. Also, this chain's priority is 
>>>> "0" (which means it executes before a comparable chain with 
>>>> priority of "1"), and any traffic that is not otherwise disposed of 
>>>> in this chain leaves the chain with a status of "accept".
>>>>
>>>> Here is a chain that allows only loopback traffic and ports 80 and 
>>>> 443, and drops everything else:
>>>>
>>>> chain myinput {
>>>>
>>>> type filter hook input priority 0; policy drop;
>>>>
>>>> ct state established,related accept
>>>>
>>>> iifname "lo" accept
>>>>
>>>> tcp dport 80 accept
>>>>
>>>> tcp dport 443 accept
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Chains can call other chains by name; that's why you'd create a 
>>>> chain that doesn't have any hook instructions, so it can be treated 
>>>> like a subroutine that you can "jump" to.
>>>>
>>>> You can also create sets of IPs, so for example you could create a 
>>>> set of trusted IPs, and then test against it something like: "ip 
>>>> saddr @trusted_ips accept".
>>>>
>>>> So, how do we put this together? A very simple router 
>>>> /etc/sysconfig/nftables.conf would look like:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> table ip myiptable {
>>>>
>>>>    # traffic with a destination of this server
>>>>
>>>>   chain my_filter_input {
>>>>
>>>>     type filter hook input priority 0; policy drop;
>>>>
>>>>     ct state established,related accept
>>>>
>>>>     iifname "lo" accept
>>>>
>>>>     ip saddr 192.168.1.0/24 tcp dport 22 accept
>>>>
>>>>     tcp dport 80 accept
>>>>
>>>>     tcp dport 443 accept
>>>>
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>>   # outbound traffic - no restrictions
>>>>
>>>>   chain my_filter_output {
>>>>
>>>>     type filter hook output priority 0; policy accept;
>>>>
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>>   # forwarded traffic - no restrictions
>>>>
>>>>   chain my_filter_forward {
>>>>
>>>>     type filter hook forward priority 0; policy accept;
>>>>
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>>   # NAT required to use this server as a router
>>>>
>>>>   chain my_nat_postrouting {
>>>>
>>>>     type nat hook postrouting priority 0; policy accept;
>>>>
>>>>     ip saddr 192.168.1.0/24 masquerade
>>>>
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>>   # DSCP to give the user at 192.168.1.2 priority over everyone else
>>>>
>>>>   chain my_route_output {
>>>>
>>>>     type route hook output priority filter; policy accept;
>>>>
>>>>     ip saddr 192.168.1.2 ip dscp cs1
>>>>
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> So you could run "nft flush ruleset; nft -f 
>>>> /etc/sysconfig/nftables.conf" to load those rules.
>>>>
>>>> Another useful command: "nft list ruleset".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/23/2023 12:01 PM, Lou Duchez wrote:
>>>>> ... even more efficiency: what happens if, ten minutes after you 
>>>>> disable the IPs, you switch to a third ruleset where the IPs are 
>>>>> disabled AFTER the "established,related" line? So hopefully all 
>>>>> those established connections will have been broken in those ten 
>>>>> minutes, and then you can go back to the efficiency of putting 
>>>>> "established,related" first.
>>>>>
>>>>> Side note, I switched to nftables a couple years ago, and I've 
>>>>> been very happy with it. There's a learning curve, but it's not 
>>>>> that terrible. I don't know that there's any advantage for your 
>>>>> particular scenario, but it seems to be what they want us to use 
>>>>> instead of iptables, and so it feels like bowing to the inevitable.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/23/2023 11:18 AM, Lou Duchez wrote:
>>>>>> Put in the rules to disable the IPs before the 
>>>>>> "established,related" line? Normally you want the 
>>>>>> "established,related" as the first thing for efficiency's sake, 
>>>>>> but if you have to put a couple rules before that, you have to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/23/2023 10:42 AM, Ben Hollingsworth wrote:
>>>>>>> I have a somewhat complex IPtables setup (configured via 
>>>>>>> fwbuilder) that protects my home network. My firewall box runs 
>>>>>>> Ubuntu server 20.04. At a certain hour each night, I block a 
>>>>>>> handful of IPs that belong to my children's devices so that they 
>>>>>>> can't use them all night. I do this by keeping two separate 
>>>>>>> IPtables configs and using cron to install the appropriate one 
>>>>>>> at the appropriate time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This works fine for blocking new connections, but I've found 
>>>>>>> that any connections that happen to be open when the new config 
>>>>>>> is loaded will continue to stay open. My kids have figured that 
>>>>>>> out as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The problem comes from this line, which exists in both configs, 
>>>>>>> and keeps related connections open across my reload:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> $IPTABLES -A FORWARD -m conntrack --ctstate ESTABLISHED,RELATED 
>>>>>>> -j ACCEPT
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there any way that I can turn off connection tracking for 
>>>>>>> only certain IPs? I'd really rather that open connections for 
>>>>>>> authorized IPs not get interrupted, but I can live with that if 
>>>>>>> I must.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> OLUG mailing list
>>>>>> OLUG at olug.org
>>>>>> https://www.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OLUG mailing list
>>>>> OLUG at olug.org
>>>>> https://www.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OLUG mailing list
>>>> OLUG at olug.org
>>>> https://www.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> *Ben "Obi-Wan" Hollingsworth* obiwan at jedi.com www.Jedi.com 
>>> <http://www.jedi.com>
>>> The stuff of earth competes for the allegiance I owe only to the
>>> Giver of all good things, so if I stand, let me stand on the
>>> promise that You will pull me through. /-- Rich Mullins/
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OLUG mailing list
>> OLUG at olug.org
>> https://www.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> Matthew G. Marsh
> Special Email Addr for OLUG ;-}
> Phone: (402) 932-7250
> Email: olug4mgm at paktronix.com
> WWW:  http://www.paksecured.org
> --------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> https://www.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug



More information about the OLUG mailing list