Skip to main content

centos - Firewalld blocks IPv6, ignores config



I'm trying to setup an IPv6 web-server on CentOS 7.2 with NGINX. I have tested my IPv6 connectivity outgoing and incoming - everything works. My IP, AAAA records, etc as fine as well. Essentially everything is OK until I enable FirewallD.



I have it set up to default to the drop zone with eth0 interface. I have enabled dhcpv6-client, http, https and ssh (ssh is on a custom port). When the firewall is enabled no IPv6 traffic can leave or enter the machine. Traceroute6 to anything (even the gateway) only goes to localhost. If I disable the firewall, it's all good.



I have no idea why this is happening. I couldn't find anything online in order to make FirewallD apply the same IPv4 config to the IPv6 traffic. I personally thought, it would do that automatically, as all of its commands are IP protocol agnostic.



Any help is much appreciated.


Answer




I ran into the same issue. After following the logic through the rules that firewalld puts in I found that the drop zone was blocking ipv6 icmp that is needed to find the ipv6 neighbors. There is a rule to allow all ipv6 icmp but firewalld puts it after the input zones which is where the drop rules go.



If you want to see this for yourself just look at the output from 'ip6tables -L -n -v'



So, a quick and dirty fix is to do this:



firewall-cmd --permanent --direct --add-rule ipv6 filter INPUT 0 -p icmpv6 -j ACCEPT


Firewalld puts the direct rules before the other input rules so that will happen before the drop rules. If you want to block things like ping you would also use a direct rule but you would need it before the rule above.




You would do something like:



firewall-cmd --permanent --direct --add-rule ipv6 filter INPUT 0 -p icmpv6 --icmpv6-type 128 -j DROP
firewall-cmd --permanent --direct --add-rule ipv6 filter INPUT 1 -p icmpv6 -j ACCEPT


The priorities will keep them in order.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able