Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    PfSense with transparent proxy not working

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.0-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    15 Posts 4 Posters 13.1k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • E
      Efonnes
      last edited by

      It was suggested that you may have your proxy configured on port 80.ย  I've been informed that you do not need it to be on port 80, and if you leave it at the default port it should be fine.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        pwnell
        last edited by

        Proxy is at the default 3128.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • jimpJ
          jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
          last edited by

          What is the output of "pfctl -sn" when you have transparent proxy enabled? And what is the date of the 2.0 BETA snapshot you are using?

          Remember: Upvote with the ๐Ÿ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

          Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

          Do not Chat/PM for help!

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • E
            eri--
            last edited by

            Can yo please try the latest snapshot and got to the System->Advanced settings and check disable webConfigurator redirect?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P
              pwnell
              last edited by

              
              # pfctl -sn
              nat-anchor "natearly/*" all
              nat-anchor "natrules/*" all
              nat on vr1 inet from 192.168.0.0/24 port = isakmp to any port = isakmp -> 92.25.211.244 port 500
              nat on vr1 inet from 192.168.1.0/24 port = isakmp to any port = isakmp -> 92.25.211.244 port 500
              nat on vr1 inet from 192.168.0.0/24 port = 5060 to any port = 5060 -> 92.25.211.244 port 5060
              nat on vr1 inet from 192.168.1.0/24 port = 5060 to any port = 5060 -> 92.25.211.244 port 5060
              nat on vr1 inet from 192.168.0.0/24 to any -> 92.25.211.244 port 1024:65535
              nat on vr1 inet from 192.168.1.0/24 to any -> 92.25.211.244 port 1024:65535
              rdr-anchor "relayd/*" all
              rdr-anchor "tftp-proxy/*" all
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 8081 -> 192.168.0.72 port 8080
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 8081 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19000
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 8081 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19000
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 13091 -> 192.168.0.38
              rdr on vr1 inet proto udp from any to any port = 13091 -> 192.168.0.38
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 13091 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19001
              rdr on em0 inet proto udp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 13091 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19001
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 13091 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19001
              rdr on vr0 inet proto udp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 13091 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19001
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = http -> 192.168.0.39
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = http tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19002
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = http tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19002
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = rsh-spx -> 192.168.0.20 port 22
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = rsh-spx tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19003
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = rsh-spx tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19003
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 3390 -> 192.168.0.39 port 3389
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 3390 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19004
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 3390 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19004
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 5721 -> 192.168.0.39
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 5721 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19005
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 5721 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19005
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = https -> 192.168.0.39
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = https tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19006
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = https tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19006
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 3395 -> 192.168.0.38 port 3389
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 3395 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19007
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 3395 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19007
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 8069 -> 192.168.0.50 port 80
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 8069 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19008
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 8069 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19008
              rdr on vr1 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 8088 -> 192.168.1.45 port 80
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 8088 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19009
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 92.25.211.244 port = 8088 tag PFREFLECT -> 127.0.0.1 port 19009
              no rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 192.168.0.0/16 port = http
              no rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 172.16.0.0/12 port = http
              no rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to 10.0.0.0/8 port = http
              no rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 192.168.0.0/16 port = http
              no rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 172.16.0.0/12 port = http
              no rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to 10.0.0.0/8 port = http
              rdr on em0 inet proto tcp from any to ! (em0) port = http -> 127.0.0.1 port 80
              rdr on vr0 inet proto tcp from any to ! (vr0) port = http -> 127.0.0.1 port 80
              rdr-anchor "miniupnpd" all
              
              

              Will try latest snapshot

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • jimpJ
                jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                last edited by

                Looking at that, you may want to disable NAT reflection instead.

                Remember: Upvote with the ๐Ÿ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                Do not Chat/PM for help!

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • P
                  pwnell
                  last edited by

                  And use split DNS instead?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • jimpJ
                    jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                    last edited by

                    Well try it as a test and see if it makes a difference.

                    If it does, perhaps the NAT reflection code may need adjusted to accommodate for this kind of scenario.

                    Remember: Upvote with the ๐Ÿ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                    Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                    Do not Chat/PM for help!

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P
                      pwnell
                      last edited by

                      Hmm Split DNS does not work reliably for me so I cannot use it. It made no difference.

                      When I disable NAT reflection and add a domain monitoring.xxx.com to my split DNS config I get round robined between my public IP and the internal one - not matter how I flush the DNS cache or reboot:

                      waldo@vcs ~ $ ping monitoring.xxx.com
                      PING monitoring.xxx.com (192.168.0.39): 56 data bytes
                      64 bytes from 192.168.0.39: icmp_seq=0 ttl=128 time=0.448 ms
                      ^C
                      --- monitoring.fhblack.com ping statistics ---
                      1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
                      round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.448/0.448/0.448/0.000 ms
                      waldo@vcs ~ $ ping monitoring.xxx.com
                      PING monitoring.xxx.com (192.168.0.39): 56 data bytes
                      64 bytes from 192.168.0.39: icmp_seq=0 ttl=128 time=0.392 ms
                      ^C
                      --- monitoring.fhblack.com ping statistics ---
                      1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
                      round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.392/0.392/0.392/0.000 ms
                      waldo@vcs ~ $ ping monitoring.xxx.com
                      PING yyy.dyndns.org (92.25.211.244): 56 data bytes
                      64 bytes from 92.25.211.244: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.312 ms
                      64 bytes from 92.25.211.244: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.351 ms
                      ^C
                      --- sram.dyndns.org ping statistics ---
                      2 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
                      round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.312/0.332/0.351/0.019 ms
                      
                      
                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • jimpJ
                        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                        last edited by

                        Disabling NAT reflection was only to test whether or not your transparent proxy worked, not a test of split DNS.

                        Did your transparent proxy work with NAT reflection off?

                        Remember: Upvote with the ๐Ÿ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                        Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                        Do not Chat/PM for help!

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • P
                          pwnell
                          last edited by

                          @jimp:

                          Disabling NAT reflection was only to test whether or not your transparent proxy worked, not a test of split DNS.

                          Did your transparent proxy work with NAT reflection off?

                          I know that is why I replied:

                          "Hmm Split DNS does not work reliably for me so I cannot use it. It made no difference."

                          That referred to the transparent proxy testing.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • jimpJ
                            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                            last edited by

                            That was not at all clear from what you wrote, sorry.

                            The output of pfctl -sn with NAT reflection disabled may help, but you might want to wait until the next snapshot (or gitsync) and try to disable the https webgui redirect.

                            Remember: Upvote with the ๐Ÿ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                            Do not Chat/PM for help!

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • P
                              pwnell
                              last edited by

                              Sorry if I was unclear.

                              Will wait for the next build and try it.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.