Restrictions outside DMZ

Similar Questions

• NAT VPN outside-> dmz

  Hi all

  I have some problems with nat/sheep on a pix 515e.

  the pix is connected to a tunnel of site2site on the external interface.

  the problem is to ping the vpn tunnel to the hosts of the demilitarized zone.

  I think it should with a static entry as follows:

  static (outside, dmz) 10.43.26.0 10.43.26.0 netmask 255.255.254.0

  but in the newspaper, I always get the message:

  305005: no outside group translation not found for icmp src: 10.43.27.250 dmz:10.43.100.3 (type 8, code 0) dst

  I also tried a nat rule 0 without success.

  Then I attached a config performed:

  access-list allowed sheep ip 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

  access-list allowed sheep ip 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0

  access-list allowed sheep ip 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 200.1.58.0 255.255.255.0

  access-list allowed sheep ip 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 172.16.0.0 255.255.0.0

  IP outdoor 199.99.99.2 255.255.254.0

  IP address inside the 10.43.8.12 255.255.240.0

  10.43.100.2 dmz IP address 255.255.255.0

  Global (outside) 1 199.99.99.11 netmask 255.255.255.255

  Global (outside) 1 199.99.99.14 netmask 255.255.255.255

  Global (dmz) 1 10.43.100.50 - 10.43.100.98 netmask 255.255.255.0

  Global (dmz) 1 10.43.100.99 netmask 255.255.255.0

  NAT (inside) 0 access-list sheep

  NAT (inside) 1 10.43.0.44 255.255.255.255 0 0

  NAT (inside) 1 10.43.8.0 255.255.255.0 0 0

  NAT (inside) 1 10.43.9.0 255.255.255.0 0 0

  static (inside, outside) 199.99.99.2 tcp telnet 10.43.8.52 telnet netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  static (inside, dmz) 10.43.8.29 10.43.8.29 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  static (inside, dmz) 10.43.8.20 10.43.8.20 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  static (dmz, external) 199.99.99.6 10.43.100.6 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  public static 199.99.99.7 (Interior, exterior) 10.43.9.56 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  public static 199.99.99.5 (Interior, exterior) 10.43.8.53 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  static (dmz, external) 199.99.99.4 10.43.100.4 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  static (dmz, external) 199.99.99.3 10.43.100.3 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0

  static (outside, dmz) 10.43.26.0 10.43.26.0 netmask 255.255.254.0 0 0

  Access-group acl_out in interface outside

  acl_in access to the interface inside group

  Access-group acl_dmz in dmz interface

  any tips?

  Thank you

  Armin

  Without seeing the rest of the config it is difficult to tell you exactly what's happening (IE ACL, sysopt connection ipsec permits etc.)

  However, you will need to have a sheep for the DMZ traffic back through the VPN:

  IP 10.43.100.0 allow Access-list sheep-dmz 255.255.255.0 10.43.27.0 255.255.255.0

  NAT (dmz) access-list sheep-dmz

  Also remove the 10.43.26.0 static (outside, dmz) 10.43.26.0 netmask 255.255.254.0 0 0. I see no reason for you to destination NAT.

  HTH

• ASA5500 - anyconnect VPN not access Web server in DMZ

  I am at a loss. I enclose my config. I can access DMZ from within the network, but cannot access DMZ of VPN.

  Any help would be great.

  Rich

  Also have question access to management 0/0 (192.168.1.1) of the Interior of the E0/1 (192.168.2.0) network

  @richyanni1 ,

  For your VPN - DMZ problem, the following is the most likely cause of your problem:

  nat (inside,dmz) source static obj-dmz obj-dmz destination static obj-vpnpool obj-vpnpool

  You should have in place:

  nat (outside,dmz) source static obj-vpnpool obj-vpnpool static obj-dmz obj-dmz

  That's because VPN clients appear to come from the outside (to some purposes NAT) and the need to be exempt from NAT to access the resources of the DMZ. Management problems, the problem is asymmetric routing. When your packages arrive on the management UI, the ASA will try to send back traffic (starting with the 3-way TCP transfer protocol which will fail) through the inside interface but that won't work because ASA helped him, the source of the acknowledgement of receipt would SAA within the interface IP address, not the address of interface management in which the SYN sent. That's why most of the people have not historically used the management interface to ASA unless you have a real out-of-band network for management. Cisco recently introduced a separate fair management routing table, but you need to switch to 9.5 (1) or later to take advantage of that.

• DMZ Design - DMZ <>- NAT internal

  Hi all

  I would like to get opinions on the question of whether what follows adds really any additional security.

  We have a public facing firewall and internal network. I create a DMZ to host some public facing Web servers. Im going to NAT public IP addresses in the private address DMZ. My question is if you think it is a good idea also NAT on the DMZ (private) in a (private) address on our internal network. The idea being the real addresses of the DMZ servers would not routable on our internal network and internal clients could connect only to the internal NAT address of DMZ servers. As far I understand it, this adds a layer of complexity, but not necessarily security. Euther way I need to be filtering traffic in both directions for DMZ <->internal. (and of course <->outside DMZ).

  What would you do?

  Appreciate your help

  Andy

  Andy

  Don't know what you get by doing this. Even if real private addresses in the DMZ servers were not routable addresses Natted should be for internal users to access the servers in the DMZ, if indeed they must. And if they do not want to then just don't advertise the route to your internal network.

  I agree with you, because I don't see any additional security benefit with additional complexity. I wouldn't do it myself.

  Jon

• PIX firewall problem

  I have two servers, one in pix inside and the other in the demilitarized zone. I wanted to set them up so that they can communicate with routers and switches

  Located outside the pix firewall.

  My inner Server works fine, able to go Internet and able to comminicate with all devices located outside the Pix Firewall. Here is reference configuration

  of insideserver.

  outside_acl list extended access allowed host x.223.188.0 255.255.255.0 172.28.32.50 ip

  outside_acl list extended access permit ip host host x.219.212.217 172.28.32.50

  access-list extended sheep permit ip host 172.28.32.50 host x.219.212.217

  access-list extended sheep permit ip host 172.28.32.50 x.223.188.0 255.255.255.0

  inside_acl list extended access permit ip host 172.28.32.50 all

  But my DMZ server does not work. However, I made the same configuration with respect to the server on the inside. Not able to communicate with outside DMZ server

  network.

  outside_acl list extended access allowed host x.223.188.0 255.255.255.0 172.28.92.72 ip

  outside_acl list extended access permit ip host host x.219.212.217 172.28.92.72

  access-list extended sheep permit ip host 172.28.92.72 host x.219.212.217

  access-list extended sheep permit ip host 172.28.92.72 x.223.188.0 255.255.255.0

  dmz_acl list extended access permit ip host 172.28.92.72 all

  If I create a static entry for your DMZ SNMP server.

  static (edn, external) 172.28.92.72 172.28.92.72 netmask 255.255.255.255

  He starts to communicate with external devices, but stops Internet run on this server. same configuration

  works with the server on the inside, but not with dmz server.

  NAT (inside) 0 access-list sheep

  NAT (inside) 3 172.28.32.0 255.255.255.0

  NAT (dmz) 3 172.28.92.0 255.255.255.0

  Global interface 3 (external)

  Your static entry is bypassing your nat (dmz) 3 entry. You can do NAT exemption instead, as you do to your home

  1. remove the static entry (followed by clear xlate)

  Add - nat 0 access-list sheep (dmz)

  I suggest to use two acl different sheep, one for each interface.

  Ex: nonat_inside

  nonat_dmz

• SETP setp ASA 5505 configuration to inspect traffic

  I have,

  I m strugling with the correct procedure to configure ASA to inspect traffic and only allow traffic any inside out and DMZ.

  Fix my not if necessary:

  1. Configure the interfaces
     • IP address
     • Nameif
     • Security level
  2. Configure the NAT
     • Translation on the inside to the outside
     • Trasnlation from inside the DMZ
     • Static translation from the outside to the DMZ
  3. Create ACLs
     • ACL to allow traffic between the inside and outside
     • ACL to allow traffic from inside the DMZ
     • ACL to form of traffic outside DMZ
  4. Create inspect policy
     1. Class creat card
     2. Create political map
     3. Define type of traffic to be inspected
     4. Associate the policy with the interface

  After that I shoul http ping server and access from outside the network.

  Rigth?

  Greetings from King,

  Antonio

  Hello

  Firstly, the route you created is false. It should be a default route that points to a destination 'ANY' and 'ANY' destination mask. For example, Road outside 0 62.28.190.65 0.

  Second, you don't have politically at the moment because there is a map of default policy already configured with the most important protocols. As a result, ICMP is inspected by default.

  In the third place, to test the traffic between hosts no ICMP routers. Maybe the ISP router blocking an incoming ICMP packets to itself. This means that you will need to create an ACL that applies to the ISP router to allow ICMP to himself. Then, to save all these hassle, just add two hosts as mentioned.

  If you insist on working with routers, do a trace of package for me as shown below:

  entry packet-trace inside 8 0 and post the result.

  Kind regards

  AM

• Translation NAT PIX problem

  Hello everyone I have the following situation on a running 6.2.2 PIX 520

  I have three interfaces inside, outside, dmz

  on the external interface have an access list to allow icmp from the IPs behind the DMZ interface, I have the following:

  external_access_in list of access permit icmp any 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0

  NAT (dmz) 0 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 0 0

  Access-group external_access_in in interface outside

  1.1.1.0 are routed over the internet, ip addresses of the foregoing allows external hosts don't ping my hosts behind the dmz interface

  I'm doing the same thing try to allow hosts behind the area demilitarized the hosts behind the inside interface to icmp ping:

  dmz_in ip access list allow a whole

  NAT (inside) 0 1.1.5.0 255.255.255.0 0 0

  Access-group dmz_in in dmz interface

  The Interior allows entering by default.

  But I have the newspaper:

  305005: no group of translation not found for icmp src dmz:1.1.1.1 dst domestic: 1.1.5.1 (type 8, code 0)

  In my view, the situation is the same thing as the ping outside the demilitarized zone.

  I have:

  ethernet0 nameif outside security0

  nameif ethernet1 inside the security100

  nameif dmz security50 ethernet2

  Could someone tell me where I'm wrong, and how to allow the demilitarized area welcomes guests inside interface to icmp ping.

  Thanks for your replies.

  When you use "nat 0" with a network after him, it does NOT work as a static/ACL combination that normally, you need to move from a lower to a higher security security interface, as you do here. With "nat 0", traffic not from higher security first interface, THEN traffic can flow from the lower security interface. In your example, the traffic should flow inside the DMZ BEFORE traffic flows from the DMZ to the inside. The reason it works with the DMZ to outside traffic is that traffic probably sank DMZ for outside already, while traffic then flows from the outside to the DMZ.

  NAT 0 is probably something I would keep away from, could the interpretations of the causes like that. IT is IS NOT THE SAME AS STATIC/ACL PAIR., although it is similar.

  I would replace your statements "nat 0" with the following:

  > static (dmz, outside) 1.1.1.0 1.1.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0

  > static 1.1.5.0 (inside the dmz) 1.1.5.0 netmask 255.255.255.0

  You have still a static, but you translate it into himself, effectively bypassing NAT (even though it still go through the NAT process). Traffic will then be able to move back and forth without worrying. It's easier to read and follow for me too, but that's just my opinion.

• Conversion of lines to the ACL

  I have an inside/outside/dmz configuration. I am NAT from inside to outside.

  I would like to convert LEADS to ACL statements, but I'm a little confused about some things, and I can't find examples of good config anywhere.

  If, for example, I have a global static, assigned to an address inside and a conduit between this world and an outside addy, ACL control shall be applied (incoming) outside, inside (incoming), or both?

  Any help or reference to examples of good config would be more useful.

  Thanks in advance,

  John

  The access list would be implemented the same way. You create the statement of access using the remote resource list and the external address four of your resources.

  access-list allow tcp options

  The access-group command allows you to assign the access list for an interface.

  group-access to the interface

  The PIX looks at the package to the address of the remote source and local destination address, which you will be external IP address. The static mapping to the internal IP address occurs after the package, he went from the ACL.

  I hope that helps

  Kevin Kelly

• problem; No secondray of ip address allowed on PIX

  Hi enfineers;

  I have 3 email server on the inside, outside and in the demilitarized zone.

  each of them must communicate with each other .i gave inside an invalid ip address.

  DMZ and oueside each of them have a valid but in another range to achieve a purpose.

  So what I have to do special dmz and outeside communicateable.

  any comment is appreciated.

  Hello

  So what I understood from your email

  -You have 3 email servers. Each of them is inside, outside and dmz and you want to make communication allow all three.

  If the above is the case, then don't forget the following rules

  -If you go to safe area higher to the lower security zone (inside the area demilitarized or inside outwards or dmz for outside) so you must use nat and global declarations

  -If you come from security zone than the security zone higher (like outdoors indoors or outside dmz or demilitarized zone, inside) then you must create static translations for the machines that you want to make visible to the lower security areas and open the access list for those who translated the IPS with the correct destination ports.

  Hope the above helps

  Thank you

  Zia

• ASA VPN - how much IP address?

  If anyone can help on this configuration of the DMZ?  This is taken from the book. If the firewall of the ASA has a public IP (209.165.201.225) on the external interface, then on my router? This means that I need 3 public ip address? ISP-(adsl with public ip) [b] ROUTER [/ b] (fa0/0 209.165.201.226)---(outside=209.165.201.225)[b]ASA5505[/b](inside=192.168.1.1) the router route providing the PUBLIC ip address of the ASA outside intellectual property (how one translation)? I know by ASA will need a translation of outside DMZ and with an access list to allow traffic. Right now, my company only has a public IP address.  How can I make this work? Thank you!.

  Hello

  If you have a public IP address unique usable, you can have this IP address on the router (internet gateway) and have a segment between the router and ASA.

  By port forwarding, you can have incoming traffic sent to the ASA by the router (such as VPNS, for example).

  The ASA will not need a public IP address that is configured on the external interface as long as the device with the public IP (router) can redirect traffic to private IP assigned to the WAN of the ASA interface.

  Hope that makes sense.

  Federico.

• Tunnel VPN ASA 5520 (DMZ + INSIDE) destined for OUTSIDE

  I can't find any reference to anywhere else.

  We have an ASA 5520 to our site HQ (inside the network) with several regional subnets on the DMZ interface.

  We need connectivity VPN Site to Site between the INSIDE and a remote control on the OUTSIDE of the site, as well as between the DMZ subnets and even outside the site. The interface from the OUTSIDE of the SAA must be local VPN endpoint for all tunnels.

  I created a S2S VPN between the INSIDE and the OUTSIDE site and it works great.

  When I create a VPN S2S tunnel between a site of DMZ and even outside the site (using the same settings the and remote, but with a cryptomap different because the local subnet (DMZ) is different from the other inside the subnet, the traffic gets the mapping (show crypto isakmp his) to the same cryptomap that was created for the access to the tunnel from the OUTSIDE) , instead of to the new cryptomap, so remote endpoint deletes it, and traffic also causes SPI incorrect of for the remote endpoint, which makes the original INTERIOR outside OF THE VPN tunnel to fall from time to time.

  Is this a bug?

  I also did a local S2S VPN tunnel configuration test of networks as everything INSIDE and the DMZ. With the help of the wizard VPN S2S leads ASA only to create a NAT rule exempted for the subnet on the INSIDE interface. Can I manually create another tax-exempt NAT rule to the side of the DMZ and use this a S2S tunnel to connect sites inside and DMZ to the remote OFF-SITE in a connection profile?

  I'm building a Rube Goldberg?

  Thank you

  George

  Hi George,.

  It seems you have a situation overlapping it, are you sure that subnets inside did not overlap with the networks from the DMZ?  A package tracer could clarify wha that the ASA is actually sending.

  In addition, you can merge the two interfaces on the same card encryption if you wish, just make sure that the NAT is configured correctly.   For example; Source NAT (all, outside) static...

  It may be useful

  -Randy-

• Access from outside ASA5505 DMZ

  I have a server (internal network) where I redirect all external smtp traffic (works fine), when I move this server to the DMZ and redirect all smtp traffic to change:

  static (inside, outside) tcp interface smtp 10.100.10.6 smtp netmask 255.255.255.255

  for

  static (inside, outside) tcp interface smtp 10.100.20.10 smtp netmask 255.255.255.255

  Traffic can get the demilitarized zone, which escapes me?

  Complete attached configuration

  The static command must be...

  static TCP (DMZ, outside) interface smtp 10.100.20.10 smtp netmask 255.255.255.255

  Please evaluate the useful messages.

• second Web server on the DMZ not visible outside

  With the help of a PIX 515e

  I have several Web servers in the DMZ, the first web server and the mail server are set up with the port mapping for the PIX outside IP address of the interface.

  The second and third (inside interface) of the Web servers are configured with static mappings and access lists.

  I can see the first n the mail very good server webserver, but I can not see servers in second or third.

  What have I done wrong?

  I suggest you analysze traffic with the command to 'capture' PIX and sniff traffic on the DMZ and outside traffic.

  Check if packets arrive to the external interface, if it reaches the web server and is at - it a response.

  example of

  IP access-list 120 allow any HOST 207.236.60.35

  capture the access-list 120 vpncap OUTSIDE interface

  See the access-list 120 retail vpncap capture

  or

  https://PIX-IP-address/capture/vpncap [/pcap]

  To remove the capture:

  No vpncap capture

  sincerely

  Patrick

• traffic to DMZ for outside

  I have a local web server with the IP for 192.168.2.2

  with I connect to the internet.

  outside pix has IP 192.168.1.2

  Global 192.168.2.20 - dmz 192.168.2.40 1

  Global 192.168.1.50 - Outdoor 192.168.1.80

  NAT 1 192.168.1.0

  NAT 1 192.168.2.0

  from inside lan, I can pin to dmz (not the dmz interface), and I can also ping to internet

  Route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.2 1

  Dmz route 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.2 (not accepted by pix) why?

  I can't ping, bronze for the internet of DMZ

  I ping from shoul sec50 dry Internet 100 without problems.

  If someone could explain it.

  Thank you

  GIS

  My last paragraph on the lower security interfaces was wrong... my apologies.

  Must you have a global (outside) statement and you just need a statement by nat (dmz). The global (dmz) 1 192.168.2.3 will make it appear as if everything that comes from inside the dmz interface will come from 192.168.2.3.

  Once again, my apologies.

  Doug.

• ASA 5505 DMZ for the guest wireless access

  Hello

  Here is my delima:

  I'm deploying an Apple Airport Extreme BaseStation with Airport Express 7 "repeaters" throughout my network/building. Apple only allows only two wireless networks, public and private. Your selection of only can 192.168.x.x, 172.13.x.x or 10.10.x.x for each subnet. NO tagging VLAN.

  It wasn't my decision... Apple CEO hs fever.

  So Im stuck on how to implement this without VLAN. The comments/public subnet needs to be isolated outside access. While the private subnet requires access to both.

  Any suggestion would be greatly apprecaited.

  What will the Security Plus license allow me to do?

  Security over the license allows the use of circuits for the ASA 5505.  It also increases the maximum number of VLANS configurable at 20.  Allows active failover / standby and increases the number of authorized IPsec VPN tunnels.

  The problem with the basic license is that you can have 3 VLAN configured and the 3rd VLAN is a VLAN 'restricted '.  This means that you can not pass traffic to or from inside VLAN on the 3rd VLAN (or DMZ VLAN if you prefer to call it that.)  So this VLAN DMZ won't be able to communicate with the internet.

  So, if your private wireless network and the local network will be on the same subnet your public wireless network can be in VLAN 3.  If this isn't the case, you will need to get the security over the license.

  --
  Please do not forget to rate and choose a good answer