[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9924?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Fabrice Brazier updated CLOUDSTACK-9924:
----------------------------------------
    Description: 
Adding new egress rule in the ACL list is always added in the same order and 
does not take into account the rule number. For instance, if we add the 
following rule from CloudStack GUI:

10      8.8.8.8/32      Allow   ICMP                            -1      -1      
Egress          
11      8.8.4.4/32      Allow   ICMP                            -1      -1      
Egress          
12      8.8.8.8/32      Deny    ICMP                            -1      -1      
Egress  

On the virtual router, we can see that the drop rule is on the top:

root@r-72-VM:~# iptables -S -t mangle
....
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 224.0.0.18/32 -j ACCEPT
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 225.0.0.50/32 -j ACCEPT
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.8.8/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j DROP
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.4.4/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.8.8/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT
.....

That means in this scenario, I won't be able to ping 8.8.8.8/32 because the 
drop rule is before the accept rule.

  was:
Adding new egress rule in the ACL list is always added in the same order and 
does not take into account the rule number. For instance, if we add the 
following rule from CloudStack GUI:

10      8.8.8.8/32      Allow   ICMP                            -1      -1      
Egress          
11      8.8.4.4/32      Allow   ICMP                            -1      -1      
Egress          
12      8.8.8.8/32      Deny    ICMP                            -1      -1      
Egress  

On the virtual router, we can see that the drop rule is on the top:

root@r-72-VM:~# iptables -S -t mangle
....
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 224.0.0.18/32 -j ACCEPT
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 225.0.0.50/32 -j ACCEPT
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.8.8/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j DROP
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.4.4/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT
-A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.8.8/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT
.....

That mean is this scenario, I won't be able to ping 8.8.8.8/32 because the drop 
rule is before the accept rule.


> ACL egress rule doesn't take care of the rule number
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CLOUDSTACK-9924
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9924
>             Project: CloudStack
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the 
> default.) 
>          Components: VPC
>    Affects Versions: 4.9.2.0
>         Environment: ACS 4.9.2 with 4.6.0 system template 
>            Reporter: Fabrice Brazier
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 4.10.0.0, 4.9.3.0
>
>         Attachments: 2017-05-18_16-31-39.png, 2017-05-18_16-32-20.png
>
>
> Adding new egress rule in the ACL list is always added in the same order and 
> does not take into account the rule number. For instance, if we add the 
> following rule from CloudStack GUI:
> 10    8.8.8.8/32      Allow   ICMP                            -1      -1      
> Egress          
> 11    8.8.4.4/32      Allow   ICMP                            -1      -1      
> Egress          
> 12    8.8.8.8/32      Deny    ICMP                            -1      -1      
> Egress  
> On the virtual router, we can see that the drop rule is on the top:
> root@r-72-VM:~# iptables -S -t mangle
> ....
> -A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 224.0.0.18/32 -j ACCEPT
> -A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 225.0.0.50/32 -j ACCEPT
> -A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.8.8/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j DROP
> -A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.4.4/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT
> -A ACL_OUTBOUND_eth2 -d 8.8.8.8/32 -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT
> .....
> That means in this scenario, I won't be able to ping 8.8.8.8/32 because the 
> drop rule is before the accept rule.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Reply via email to