[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9495?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15495857#comment-15495857
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on CLOUDSTACK-9495:
--------------------------------------------
Github user murali-reddy commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1666
@karuturi i did not change the logic of how and what iptables rules were
added in the original patch. I just stream lined rule action deny/allow logic
for all the protocols.
I have updated the patch as there is one more egress rule bug
"CLOUDSTACK-9495: Egress rules functionalty broken when protocol=all
specified". Now iptable rules are only inserted in the front.
> Egress rules functionalty broken when protocol=all specified
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CLOUDSTACK-9495
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9495
> Project: CloudStack
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the
> default.)
> Affects Versions: 4.6.2, 4.7.1, 4.8.0, 4.9.0
> Reporter: Murali Reddy
> Assignee: Murali Reddy
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 4.10.0.0, 4.9.1.0, 4.8.2.0
>
>
> Egress rules handling in
> systemvm/patches/debian/config/opt/cloud/bin/configure.py, class CsAcl,
> add_rule() has below logic for handling protocol
> {code}
> if rule['protocol'] != "all":
> fwr += " -s %s " % cidr + \
> " -p %s " % rule['protocol'] + \
> " -m %s " % rule['protocol'] + \
> " --dport %s" % rnge
> {code}
> There is no else block to handle case when protocol in 'all' in which case
> CIDR never gets passed to the iptables command, hence resulting in accept all
> rule FW_EGRESS_RULES chain.
> To reproduce the issue just give any cidr in the guest subnet, for e.g.
> 10.1.1.27/31 and protocol all and see the result in FW_EGRESS_RULES of the
> filter table, you will see accept all rule.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
