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

    Firewall rules based on interface

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Firewalling
    20 Posts 7 Posters 7.7k 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.
    • X
      XIII
      last edited by

      Only the LAN Interface has the allow all rule by default all other Interfaces have no rules (except WAN). To allow your other Interfaces Internet access you would have to setup rules doing so.

      -Chris Stutzman
      Sys0:2.0.1: AMD Sempron 140 @2.7 1024M RAM 100GHD
      Sys1:2.0.1: Intel P4 @2.66 1024M RAM 40GHD
      freedns.afraid.org - Free DNS dynamic DNS subdomain and domain hosting.
      Check out the pfSense Wiki

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • F
        fwadmin
        last edited by

        So my original question still stands.  Can I create rules based solely on the ingress and egress physical interfaces to create zone based security.  Additionally, can i create a rule solely based on the egress interface i.e. Source - any, Destination - any, Port - any, In - <any interface="">. Out - inf1?</any>

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • X
          XIII
          last edited by

          Yes and yes

          -Chris Stutzman
          Sys0:2.0.1: AMD Sempron 140 @2.7 1024M RAM 100GHD
          Sys1:2.0.1: Intel P4 @2.66 1024M RAM 40GHD
          freedns.afraid.org - Free DNS dynamic DNS subdomain and domain hosting.
          Check out the pfSense Wiki

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • F
            fwadmin
            last edited by

            Is there a FAQ or 'how to' about this?  I have been unable to figure this out through the interface, forums, and documentation.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • X
              XIII
              last edited by

              Like this?

              http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Category:Firewall_Rules

              To add rules go to Firewall>Rules and select the interface you want to add rules to. To add a rule you click the plus sign.

              See attached image, change LAN Net to the interface you are applying this rule to, additionally you could copy that rule to another interface by clicking the plus sign to the right of the rule,  just edit LAN Net to apply to the appropriate network (ie: Opt1 Net)

              BasicAllowAllRule.png
              BasicAllowAllRule.png_thumb

              -Chris Stutzman
              Sys0:2.0.1: AMD Sempron 140 @2.7 1024M RAM 100GHD
              Sys1:2.0.1: Intel P4 @2.66 1024M RAM 40GHD
              freedns.afraid.org - Free DNS dynamic DNS subdomain and domain hosting.
              Check out the pfSense Wiki

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • F
                fwadmin
                last edited by

                I don't think i have been very clear about the problem.  I want to create a firewall rule similar to what I can do with IPTABLES in a chain rule i.e.

                -A FORWARD -i PUBLIC1 -j OUTBOUND_ALL
                -A OUTBOUND_ALL -o OUTSIDE -m state –state NEW -j ACCEPT

                There are no references to subnets or IP's.  Simply allowing traffic in one interface and out another.  One side of the rule depends on the other.  That might be the caveat that is creating confusion.  The first rule doesn't allow anything by itself.  Though it defines what is allowed inbound on the PUBLIC1 interface, nothing is allowed without the second line.

                With the -i switch and possibly utilizing the anchor feature of pfctl, I hoping to do the same with pfsense.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • M
                  Metu69salemi
                  last edited by

                  if you want to allow everything why to have osi layer 4 device, why don't simply use osi layer 3 three device(router) and there allow routing between everything

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • F
                    fwadmin
                    last edited by

                    Most of our firewalls have 10 interfaces.  We typically allow everything going out the Outside interface:

                    Source=any Destination=any Protocol=any In Interface=any Out Interface=Outside

                    This takes care of Internet access without giving access to any internal services.  Then i have intra containment zone rules such as:

                    Source=any Destination=any Protocol=CIFS,DNS, etc In Interface=InterfaceY Out Interface=InterfaceZ

                    The later rule is not the challenge here.  It is how do I give the nine containment zones full internet access without giving them access to internal services.  Better stated, without a series of deny rules, how would i do this.  This is a simple rule set:

                    All through the Outside interface for all
                    Containment Zone One to Containment Zone Two for X procotols
                    Containment Zone One to Containment Zone Three for X procotols
                    Containment Zone Four to Containment Zone Five for X procotols
                    Deny All

                    Otherwise the rule set would double:

                    Deny Containment Zone One to Containment Zone Two for X procotols
                    Deny Containment Zone One to Containment Zone Three for X procotols
                    Deny Containment Zone Four to Containment Zone Five for X procotols
                    Containment Zone One to all for all
                    Containment Zone Two to all for all
                    Containment Zone Four to all for all
                    Deny all

                    Not to mention we allow fewer protocols than we deny making the firewall configuration more complicated.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • M
                      Metu69salemi
                      last edited by

                      You could simplify rulesets by using aliases. but remember you can't mix alias types in one alias(example: IP's and Port numbers). Then configuration might be easier to read and more comfortable to use

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • X
                        XIII
                        last edited by

                        You might be able to do what you want but pfSense is designed to be administered through the gui. To do it the way you want I believe you would have to do it via CLI.

                        -Chris Stutzman
                        Sys0:2.0.1: AMD Sempron 140 @2.7 1024M RAM 100GHD
                        Sys1:2.0.1: Intel P4 @2.66 1024M RAM 40GHD
                        freedns.afraid.org - Free DNS dynamic DNS subdomain and domain hosting.
                        Check out the pfSense Wiki

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • C
                          cmb
                          last edited by

                          You cannot just specify interfaces in rules (in the GUI or the underlying system), using subnets, aliases or interface groups (likely a combination) can do what you want by using IP subnets rather than interfaces.

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

                            On 2.0 you can use floating rules and/or interface groups to get closer to what you want, but with traditional rules you do need to block inbound on the interfaces going to every other network you don't want them to access. By using aliases, you don't really need X number of individual rules, you could do it with only a couple of them.

                            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 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
                            • M
                              MikeN
                              last edited by

                              fwadmin: Did you ever manage to find a good solution to this?

                              It's really a problem I can't reliably filter traffic based on source/destination interfaces. If I allow traffic to 'the internet' (which I can't specify with an IP range), I immediately allow traffic to all other interfaces and not just the gateway interface…..

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • C
                                cmb
                                last edited by

                                @MikeN:

                                It's really a problem I can't reliably filter traffic based on source/destination interfaces. If I allow traffic to 'the internet' (which I can't specify with an IP range), I immediately allow traffic to all other interfaces and not just the gateway interface…..

                                Easy, just block or reject what you don't want to permit (most commonly with an alias of local and VPN-attached networks, if not all of RFC1918) above allowing destination "any" for required Internet traffic.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • M
                                  MikeN
                                  last edited by

                                  @cmb:

                                  @MikeN:

                                  It's really a problem I can't reliably filter traffic based on source/destination interfaces. If I allow traffic to 'the internet' (which I can't specify with an IP range), I immediately allow traffic to all other interfaces and not just the gateway interface…..

                                  Easy, just block or reject what you don't want to permit (most commonly with an alias of local and VPN-attached networks, if not all of RFC1918) above allowing destination "any" for required Internet traffic.

                                  That is an option, but:

                                  • It's error prone. If in the future new IP ranges get added to interfaces, I will have to make sure that these get blocked too. I rather have something closed/secure by default, instead of the other way around.
                                  • It's quite some work if you got multiple interfaces. I still have to look into the floating rules (running 2.0-rc3 here), and where they're added in the pf ruleset, so maybe floating rules can resolve this issue…
                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • First post
                                    Last post
                                  Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.