Crypto ACL remote Edition

Similar Questions

• Disable Split Tunneling - SAs are not when I change crypto ACL

  Hello!

  When I change my ACL Crypto I receive an error message in phase I: "PROPOSAL_NOT_CHOSEN NOTIFIER' of IKE. I do this to disable the ST and get all the hollow tunnel traffic. Please see the config below:

  crypto ISAKMP policy 10

  md5 hash

  preshared authentication

  life 3600

  ISAKMP crypto key cisco address x.x.x.x

  !

  !

  Crypto ipsec transform-set esp - the esp-hmac-md5 ENCRYPTION

  !

  crypto map ipsec-isakmp CLIENT 1

  defined peer x.x.x.x

  game of transformation-CRYPTO

  match address 115

  !

  access-list 115 permit ip 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.255 10.10.11.0 0.0.0.255

  access-list 115 deny ip any one

  I changed the ACL 115 to so I can disable split tunneling, and it looks like this:

  access-list 115 permit ip 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.255 any

  access-list 115 deny ip any one

  What is a failure? I have donthink the crypto ACL must be the same?

  OK, you use a card dynamic encryption on your head just as I suggested, so that's fine. What you have done, which is causing your problem (and usually causes more problems than it's worth), is to assign an access list to the dynamic encryption card. It is not necessary, because with a dynamic encryption the router head card accept any model of traffic the remote router sends.

  In your case since you changed the remote router to be 'all', it is no longer maps to the 115 ACL on the head and now is failing.

  Way easier around it is simply to remove the 'match 115' address card dynamic encryption on the head. This will not affect any of your other tunnels and allow the remote router to establish a tunnel.

  The exact commands you would use are as follows:

  > crypto dynamic-map PERSONAL 10

  > no address for correspondence 115

• Cisco asa 9.1: crypto acl - order, order of operations,.

  Hello

  Let's say we have the following configuration

  VPN1 list extended access permitted ip 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

  card crypto mymap 10 correspondence address vpn1

  card crypto mymap 10 peers set x.x.x.x

  access-list extended 192.168.1.0 ip VPN2 allow 255.255.255.0 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0

  mymap 20 match address vpn2 crypto card

  card crypto mymap 20 peers set y.y.y.y

  In the above example, what happens if you intend to send a packet to a host on the 10.1.1.x and her counterpart that x.x.x.x is down (not SA).

  If Asa will verify that the SA is down or away he starts the process of the next crypto access list according to the sequence number of crypto card? or simply drag the package?

  If Asa trial next crypto map entry/crypto acl and that if no matching ACL? Packets are sent as clear text?

  Thank you explantion

  Peter

  Hi Peter,.

  This would work if the first tunnel is down and there is not SA for her.

  However, it is not recommended to overlap crypto ACL.

  Kind regards

  Aditya

  Please evaluate the useful messages and mark the correct answers.

• Crypto ACL entries setting

  Hello

  It is only important that the entries on a crypto ACL are identical on both ends or the order in which they were seized of questions too? I mean, for example:

  At one end:

  A-> B

  A-> C

  On the other hand:

  C-> A

  B-> A

  What is a reason for the failure?

  Thank you!

  Guido

  Guido,

  The crypto ACL should be identical, i.e. of the mirror of the other images, but the order is not important.

  Kind regards

  Arul

  * Rate pls if it helps *.

• Crypto ACL question

  Hello

  I have a star topology IPSec VPN using a Cisco ASA as the hub and a PIX506e such as the rays.

  Two of the rays also have an IPSec VPN between them.

  The hub site connects to a WAN.

  The sites of two rays have the following ranges

  Spoke 1 = 10.154.10.0/24

  Spoke 2 = 10.156.10.0/24

  Hub = 10.8.0.0/24 site - but also connects to all other addresses in the range 10.0.0.0/8 with a back end WAN connection.

  I was looking for a way to 'Nice' configure crypto ACLs so that the traffic between the spokes 1 and 2 would be direct and then everything from 10 would go through the hub site. Rather than try to clear all the subnets in 10.0.0.0/8 except 10.156.10.0/24 & 10.154.10.0/24 in an ACL.

  If I order the cryptographic cards on the RADIUS, so the most accurate is first example (the map speaks of talking), then a card encryption to 10.0.0.0/8 for hub is second, it would work?

  So we talked 1.

  !

  allowed to access-list to-speaks-2 ip 10.154.10.0 255.255.255.0 10.156.10.0 255.255.255.0

  IP 10.154.10.0 allow Access-list to hub 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

  !

  outside_map 100 ipsec-isakmp crypto map
  card crypto outside_map 100 match address to-speaks-2
  card crypto outside_map 100 peer set 1.2.3.4
  transform-set set card crypto outside_map 100 standard
  outside_map 200 ipsec-isakmp crypto map
  card crypto outside_map 200 correspondence address to hub
  peer set card crypto outside_map 200 8.9.10.11
  transform-set set outside_map 200 crypto card standard

  !

  Any thoughts?

  Yes, reject the order is absolutely supported. Well... I forgot about 'decline' crypto ACL

• Crypto ACL

  Hello

  Any body knows if it s possible to configure the service in crypto ACL?

  Something like that:

  Crypto list access permit tcp host 1.1.1.1 1.1.1.1 eq 23

  How will be the crypto ACL on the other side?

  I apologise for the misunderstanding what kind of device you have.

  with pix v6.x, you can disable the command "sysopt connection permit-ipsec. When this command is enabled (on by default), pix will ignore any acl with encrypted traffic.

  so to disable this command, create an inbound acl, apply the acl to the external interface, and let the No. - nat and crypto such acl what.

  for example

  access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0

  access-list 120 allow ip 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0

  access-list 111 permit tcp 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0 host 192.168.1.100 eq 23

  (Inside) NAT 0-list of access 101

  Access-group 111 in external interface

  myvpn 10 ipsec-isakmp crypto map

  correspondence address card crypto myvpn 10 120

  card crypto myvpn 10 set by peer

  card crypto myvpn 10 transform-set RIGHT

• Site to site VPN ASA2ASA funny crypto ACL behavior

  Hello

  I use a VPN site-to site between two ASAs. It works but it should not work, in my opinion, there is a bug. The thing is that when I set the traffic is encrypted in an ACL, this traffic is denied and the tunnel doen't work. If I remove the ACL entries, I'm really interested in encryption, it works...

  Thus, for example.

  I affermirai a tunnel between the two ASAs and specify

  access allowed extended VPN ip host 172.16.0.60 list 172.20.24.60

  colt_map card crypto 20 matches the VPN address

  card crypto test_map 20 peers set 1.1.1.1
  test_map crypto 20 card value transform-set TEST
  3600 seconds, duration of life card crypto test_map 20 set - the security association
  card crypto test_map 20 set security-association life kilobytes 4608000

  When I have it, there is no traffic allowed between 172.16.0.60 and 172.20.24.60. And when I do:

  VPN access list extended deny ip host 172.16.0.60 172.20.24.60

  access allowed extended VPN ip host 172.16.0.59 list 172.20.24.59

  Can I get a communication between 172.16.0.60 172.20.24.60 of the host, but not between 172.16.0.59 the host 172.20.24.59.

  It seems very weird to me. I was wondering if anyone had this behaviour before or she could explain it?

  Thanks in advance.

  Yes.

  In Janan all traffic VPN is not checked against the external ACL because of a single command: sysopt connection permit VPN

  You can see if this command is enabled by practice: sh run all the sysopt

  If you remove this command: no sysopt permit vpn connection

  then, all VPN traffic is checked against the ACL interface (and you can only allow what you need).

  A better approach is to let the sysopt connection permit-vpn default and create a vpn-filter ACL that is applied to group policy for tunnel groups you need.

  Federico.

• ASA5505 - supernet crypto ACL

  Hello

  One of my clients has a corporate network consisting of 4 ASA5505s. The network looks like this:

  (HUB, 192.168.9.0/24)

  ^                              ^                               ^

  ^                              ^                               ^

  (speak, 4.0/24)   (speak, 8.0/24)   (speak, 12.0/24)

  Configuration star where we want that all private networks to be able to communicate with each other. Some dynamic l2l other tunnels are static l2l.

  I was wondering is it possible for the Tunnel ACL to use great networks?

  For example on the rays do something like:

  access-list extended 100 permit ip 192.168.4.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0

  As all of our networks are 192.168.x.x subnets? We want to avoid having to update all the rays, if we introduce another site in the VPN.

  And on the hub, something like:

  permit to_site1 to access extended list ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 192.168.4.0 255.255.255.0

  permit to_site2 to access extended list ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 192.168.8.0 255.255.255.0

  So, we do not have to add a new site is added to each time access lists?

  I was wondering if this would work, or would be considered best practice.

  Thanks in advance.

  It should work.

• Remote edition info disappears

  Whenever I turn on my computer, the connection ftp and password, which I saved for my sites, disappears and I have to be reintroduced in this one. I checked the box 'Save' every time. This only seems to happen on the last 3 sites that I created. Those I did before that seem to keep the info very well. Or it is possible that it happens only with sites I've recently worked on. I used Dreamweaver 8 since it came out and this problem only cropped up in the last two weeks.
  
  Anyway - someone else has this problem, and do you think that it is a problem of Dreamweaver or something with my computer?
  
  Lorraine
  
  

  It is a well known problem with DW8.0.

  You must apply the 8.0.2 updater
  http://www.Adobe.com/support/Dreamweaver/downloads_updaters.html#DW8

  See 'Dreamweaver 8 for Windows loses FTP login settings'
  http://www.Adobe.com/go/3491671c

  --
  Concerning

  John Waller

• ACL IPSEC - CRYPTO vs Interface

  Hello

  Where an IOS device is connected to a PIX 6.3, with a VPN IPSec site to site with ipsec connection allowed sysopt

  Thinking that it would be simpler to apply the required ACL, I created the ACL crypto to the entire subnet with the thought I would create ACL interface for nailing to specific hosts inside the subnet.  I see now that I need to disable the connection of sysopt permit-ipsec for the ACL interface to apply.

  1. is it more common for crypto ACL to be more host specific vs specific subnet and the necessary ACL ONLY (with the active sysopt)? I have a true Swiss cheese of the armies on either side of the vpn that need access and I didn't want to maintain such a complicated in meaning OPPOSITE ACL.

  2 or it is more common for both - crypto ACL (allow a simpler ACL) then apply ACL interface?

  3. I see the issue with the realization of the interface & crypto ACL, there is more that can get sent THEN denied to the remote interface, or even blocked traffic on the local side.  If the ACL interface should be used, what is the best practice here?

  4. I see the interface that acl work when sysopt allowed ipsec connection is enabled, but only on outbound traffic. Is it because traffic has not struck the crypto ACL again?

  Any pointers in the right direction would be appreciated.

  Thank you

  Dan Foxley

  Dan

  Much depends on whether the VPN device also acts as a firewall. If this isn't ie. Once the traffic has been decrypted, it is then passed on the firewall then allowed sysopt of active ipsec connection is a logical choice.

  In response to your questions, speak from my personal experience-

  (1) crypto ACL tend to be more subnet than host-based, but it depends on your specific needs.

  (2) Yes, in general the crypto acl is more general, the acl interface is where you attach.

  (3) don't know, I followed. If you want to limit this subnet traffic is sent through the tunnel then you would with an acl interface but on a different interface IE. the interface more near the source of the traffic.

  (4) it is to do with the order of treatment IE. which is done first. Not really used an acl outgoing on the same interface as endpoint vpn but I suspect you're right.

  Note that you do not need to apply the acl on the actual interface the VPN ends, at least with the code v7.x and beyond. You can terminate the VPN on the external interface, and then use an outbound acl on the interface that is sent unencrypted traffic. Yes, that means he has to go through the firewall, but it can make the management of your ACLs easier.

  Jon

• L2l Tunnel between 2POIGNEES: general query on ACL sheep/crypto

  Hi all

  For the L2L tunnel between 2POIGNEES work very well, we configure normally same network to network - sheep & cryptos ACL on both ends of the SAA. My question is...

  It will work without any problem, if on one end of the ASA, the ACL sheep & crypto are combined to form the group object (to limit the ASA configs) and on the other end address net net address ACL sheep & crypto still exists (not consolidated in the Group of objects)... ? If it works, it works even if the tunnel is between ASA--> router.

  Thanks in advance

  MS

  MS, it will work if the other side does not use the same scenario of acl consolidated using groups of objects. ACLs and groups of objects are significant locally on the device.

  You can consolidate the ACLs on the ASA/PIX using TCP or UDP-groups of objects or groups of objects network and that your acl to the respective object-group, they always have the same effect as when they have been configured individually line by line.

  This works even if the tunnel is between ASA--> router

  Yes

  HTH

  Jorge

• Possible Crypto overlap and NAT ACL open to the vs host subnet

  Hello

  For a PIX 515E 6.3 (5)

  I have the following ACL:

  List of crypto ACL

  ipsectraffic list of allowed access host ip 192.168.7.221 object-group pdvcorp-backup3-to-db1-datacenter
  ipsectraffic list of allowed access host ip 192.168.7.222 object-group pdvcorp-backup3-to-db1-datacenter
  permit ipsectraffic of the object-group corphosts-datacenter 192.168.10.0 ip access list 255.255.255.0
  ipsectraffic permit access list ip object-group Productionhosts - data center object-group access-productionhosts-data center

  In the list above Crypto ACL list, hosts, 192.168.7.221 and 192.168.7.222 are both also part of the group 'productionhosts-datacenter"referenced in the same object list ACL. What are the consequences of having the same hosts referenced in the Crypto ACL, if any?

  No NAT access list

  IP 192.168.7.0 allow Access-list sheep 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0

  In regards to the Crypto ACL above, is there a (security wise or another) problem with the opening of the entire subnet with an ACL sheep to save on the duty to nail each host.

  Thank you

  Dan

  It's okay, you can use the same source to multiple destinations.  No issues with the sheep.

• PIX - ASA, allow RA VPN clients to access servers at remote sites

  I got L2L tunnels set up for a couple of remote sites (PIX) for several months now. We have a VPN concentrator, which will go EOL soon, so I'm working on moving our existing customers of RA our ASA. I have a problem, allowing RA clients access to a server to one of our remote sites. PIX and ASA (main site) relevant config is shown below. The error I get on the remote PIX when you try a ping on the VPN client is:

  Group = 204.14. *. *, IP = 204.14. *. * cheque card static Crypto Card = outside_map, seq = 40, ACL does not proxy IDs src:172.16.200.0 dst: 172.16.26.0

  The config:

  Hand ASA config

  access extensive list ip 172.16.0.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.1.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.22.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.200.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.0.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.200.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.0.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.1.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.22.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.200.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.26.0 255.255.255.0

  card crypto outside_map 60 match address outside_cryptomap_60

  outside_map 60 set crypto map peer 24.97. *. *

  card crypto outside_map 60 the transform-set ESP-3DES-MD5 value

  map outside_map 65535-isakmp ipsec crypto dynamic outside_dyn_map

  outside_map interface card crypto outside

  =========================================

  Remote config PIX

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.0.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.1.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.22.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 inside_nat0_outbound allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.200.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.0.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.1.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.22.0 255.255.255.0

  access extensive list ip 172.16.26.0 outside_cryptomap_60 allow 255.255.255.0 172.16.200.0 255.255.255.0

  card crypto outside_map 60 match address outside_cryptomap_60

  peer set card crypto outside_map 60 204.14. *. *

  card crypto outside_map 60 the transform-set ESP-3DES-MD5 value

  outside_map interface card crypto outside

  EDIT: Guess, I might add, remote site is 172.16.26.0/24 VLAN VPN is 172.16.200.0/24...

  What you want to do is 'tunnelall', which is not split tunneling. This will still allow customers to join the main and remote site, but not allow them to access internet... unless you have expressly authorized to make a 'nat (outside)"or something. Your journey on the client will be, Secured route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0

  attributes of group policy

  Split-tunnel-policy tunnelall

  Who is your current config, I don't see where the acl of walton is attributed to what to split tunnel?

• ACL VPN question

  I have two questions that regarding ACL is used in the instructions on the Card Crypto:

  1. the two devices VPN should have the same ACE in the ACL? I know that without the second ACE site B below will not see as interesting udp traffic, but the will of the vpn tunnel fails because the ACL is not the same ACE?

  That is to say...

  Site has

  Access-list 110 permit tcp 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.2.0 255.255.255.0

  Access-list 110 permit udp 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.2.0 255.255.255.0

  Site B

  Access-list 110 permit tcp 10.0.2.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0

  2. once a tunnel is established it will send ANY/ALL traffic destined to the remote network through this tunnel. If the first ACE in the ACL 110 to Site A list is used to bring up the tunnel, only tcp from to 10.0.2.0/24 10.0.1.0/24 traffic will use the tunnel or all traffic from 10.0.1.0/24 intended for the remote network to cross the tunnel?

  I guess my thought is this. The ACL is only used to determine valuable traffic and once the tunnel is up it is a free for all. Or the ACL only allows traffic that meets the criteria specified in the ACL list to flow once the tunnel is established?

  Thank you

  Brian

  Brian,

  Your statement

  'Or the ACL allows only traffic that meets the criteria specified in the ACL list to flow after the tunnel is established'

  Is correct, only the traffic that meets the ACL crypto will go through the vpn tunnel and all other traffic will be denied. If you need UDP traffic to travel through the tunnel, you need crypto ACL on both sides and not only on one side, that is, SITE A.

  Hope this helps,

  Jay

• Help access remote in a 5505

  Hi all. Need help with a remote in a 5505. I can vpn in fine, I can't pass any traffic. When I do a ' sho cryp ipsec her ", I see the traffic that is decrypted, but I see not all traffic is encrypted to me. I have attached to my config, I could get help from you guys to see where I have gone wrong? I appreciate as always.

  Why it happens is because the ASA also has a L2L tunnel and you use same NAT 0 access-list to L2L tunnel as Crypto ACL also.

  NAT (inside) 0-list of access tocw

  card crypto outside_map 10 correspondence address tocw

  If the traffic that you send from vpn client is actually back to L2L tunnel.

  Follow these steps:

  Create access list separate for tunnel L2L specifying only specific L2L tunnel traffic.

  you need to check the remote side, but I think your crypto ACLs for l2l tunnel

  Access extensive list ip 192.168.201.0 VPNACL allow 255.255.255.0 192.168.73.0 255.255.255.0

  No crypto outside_map 10 correspondence card for tocw

  outside_map card crypto 10 corresponds to the address VPNACL

  Your L2L tunnel will descend when you make changes then make necessary arrangements.

  Verify and validate results

  HTH

  Sangaré

  Pls rate helpful messages