CzBiX, ufw does not yet manage the nat table (though there have been a
couple of false starts). However, it does manage the FORWARD chain with
'ufw route' so it is possible for you to create a chain in the nat table
in /etc/ufw/before.rules, and then use ufw route for other things. This
is describe
Does it possible to add predefined nat chains? Like what the openwrt
does.
UFW can insert `ufw_prerouting_rule`, `ufw_postrouting_rule` on start, and
remove these on stop.
User can insert their custom rules in the ufw chains, without worry about the
flush/duplicate issues.
--
You received this
Please note that the various rules files are there for admins to adjust
as needed. However, to work with other programs on the system, I
reiterate that by default ufw will not flush anything it doesn't manage
itself (MANAGE_BUILTINS, as mentioned, controls this behavior). If
someone adds rules to t
Is this going to work?
It was reported on 2011 and last comment on 2015.
It is 2018 and still after restarting ufw rules are added multiple time.
Just add this:
/etc/ufw/after_up
/etc/ufw/after_down
/etc/ufw/before_up
/etc/ufw/before_down
User can manualy add rules to *_up executed when ufw start
sry, shorter and corrected:
As a workaround, add a flush for the nat chains you want flushed at
beginning of the section like this:
*nat
:POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0]
-F POSTROUTING
-A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE
COMMIT
Warrning: This WILL also delete rules which may have been put there by
ot
As a workaround, add a flush for the nat chains you want flushed at
beginning of the section like this:
*nat
:PREROUTING ACCEPT [4:478]
:INPUT ACCEPT [4:478]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0]
:POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0]
-F POSTROUTING
-A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE
-A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE
CO
Sam, while ufw has added support for managing the FORWARD chain, it does
not yet support the nat table which is why you are seeing this issue.
Please see comments #1 and #5 in this bug for more details.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscr
Just had the same bug after executing sudo ufw reload 4 times, this is
how my iptables -t nat looks like:
Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
MASQUERADE all -- 172.17.0.0/160.0.0.0/0
RETURN all -- 192.168.122.0
@erniecom: as of 0.34 ufw does have route rules now and it also supports
customization scripts via /etc/ufw/before.init and /etc/ufw/after..init.
See 'man ufw-framework' for details.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
http
Until ufw handles forwarding from the command line, it would be nice to
have already a configuration file disable.rules to allow you to add the
iptable rules that would fully clean up what was added in before.rules
or after.rules. At the moment there is no such mechanism available and
we have to st
To be clear, once that is done, work on ufw for managing nat becomes
possible.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/881137
Title:
UFW does not clean iptables setting from /etc/ufw/before.ru
The plan has always been to add route rules to ufw (ie, ones that manage
the FORWARD chain as well as the builtins in the nat table), but this is
on the roadmap. I have a branch I've been working on for FORWARD. Once
that is done, managing nat is possible.
--
You received this bug notification be
Ok, understood.
What about adding ufw chains for *nat table? For clean solution (without
MANAGE_BUILTINS=yes) and having *nat table in before.rules this can
help.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.
You mentioned in the description that you were modifying the POSTROUTING
builtin. ufw does not (currently) manage this particular built-in in any
manner and there are no ufw chains in this built-in. Because other
software legitimately adds rules to the built-in chains (eg, libvirt),
like POSTROUTIN
BUMP, read my previous comment, this is bug.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/881137
Title:
UFW does not clean iptables setting from /etc/ufw/before.rules
To manage notifications about
It would be essentially sufficient to execute the following commands
before re-creating the UFW rules...
iptables -X ufw-user-output
iptables -X ufw-user-logging-output
iptables -X ufw-user-logging-input
iptables -X ufw-user-logging-forward
iptables -X ufw-user-limit-accept
iptables -X ufw-user-li
Please reopen this bug.
I'm *not* talking about 3rd applications which adding its own rules to
iptables.
As I wrote in description I modified *ufw* config file
/etc/ufw/before.rules (see example) and when I stopped/reload ufw it
does not cleaned above rules specified in ufw config file.
So this
Thank you for using Ubuntu and filing a bug. The behavior you describe
is actually be design, but is configurable. Many applications will add
firewall rules to the various default chains. This is done without the
ufw cli command or the ufw framework. As such, performing a flush on
'reload' becomes
** Changed in: ufw (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Jamie Strandboge (jdstrand)
** Visibility changed to: Public
** This bug is no longer flagged as a security vulnerability
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
http
19 matches
Mail list logo
