Allow Skype in a very restrictive network
-
Thanks marcello.
It is not possible for me to disable rule to deny all. I can not do ALLOW ALL at any cost :) I am not considering using proxy for skype access. I want to do it with the firewall itself.
Snort is able to identify skype user agent, so layer 7 should also be able to identify it without MITM. I am looking for the configuration rules on the firewall assuming that Layer 7 signature is able to identify skype and DENY ALL is the default firewall rule.
Any help with firewall rules will be gratefully appreciated.
-
Layer7 rules can only be used to block or traffic shape, they cannot make a "pass" decision. Mostly this is because you cannot inspect the traffic to see what's inside it unless it's been passed. You can't tell one connection from another on the same port until the data is flowing so it can be inspected.
Even so, the Skype L7 pattern is known to have issues, I'm not sure if anyone has come up with a new pattern to match it yet.
-
Layer7 rules can only be used to block or traffic shape, they cannot make a "pass" decision. Mostly this is because you cannot inspect the traffic to see what's inside it unless it's been passed. You can't tell one connection from another on the same port until the data is flowing so it can be inspected.
Thanks for your reply jimp.
My understanding is that Floating rules are checked before interface specific rules and the last rule matched on "floating" is applied unless quick is checked which prevents further processing for that packet.
So, if I create a floating rule that queues the traffic identified by Layer 7 and enable "quick" match, would it be able to push the packets to a queue without matching the "DENY ALL" rule? I can create a separate queue for the matched traffic.
Even so, the Skype L7 pattern is known to have issues, I'm not sure if anyone has come up with a new pattern to match it yet.
I had seen some update on Skype L7 pattern in the forum. I will search again and post. Nevertheless, it will be great to learn the logic for using any random Layer 7 (say gtalk for that matter) rule in a scenario like mine.
-
That would not work. You must pass the packets to the L7 inspection, then the L7 inspection chooses to deny them or not based on the pattern.
If any rule blocked the traffic it could never establish an actual connection, so it wouldn't pass any data, so L7 couldn't match it.
You can't do DPI unless you have P's to I!
-
That would not work. You must pass the packets to the L7 inspection, then the L7 inspection chooses to deny them or not based on the pattern.
If any rule blocked the traffic it could never establish an actual connection, so it wouldn't pass any data, so L7 couldn't match it.
You can't do DPI unless you have P's to I!
Thanks Jim for explaining it in such a precise and easy to understand manner.
That means, in order to allow skype, I would need to do an "ALLOW ALL" for TCP/UDP ports 1025:65535 and use L7 rules to block unwanted traffic. That would create a large L7 filter list and some performance issues might come up.
Other solution was Snort, but we can't run it inline here AFAIK.
I must say, Skype is a pain for both - those who want to allow and those who want to block it.
-
I have never had any luck with the Skype L7 rules and afaik from looking at many posts here, nobody else has either.
What did work for me was Squid/Squidguard in non-transparent mode with an ACL with the "no ip addresses in URL" tickbox checked.
Selective Skype access/deny Ā could be done via client ip in the group ACL -
I am not considering using proxy for skype access. I want to do it with the firewall itself.
I had to resort to a web proxy to be able to login on Facebook, as nobody could came up with a workable solutionā¦.good luck to you
-
I am not considering using proxy for skype access. I want to do it with the firewall itself.
The way it could work is to allow https for an internal clients host alias applied to a lan rule.
It will allow access to any https site too but skype will work.I had to resort to a web proxy to be able to login on Facebook, as nobody could came up with a workable solutionā¦.good luck to you
web proxy is a workable solution. Ā ;)
-
I had to resort to a web proxy to be able to login on Facebook, as nobody could came up with a workable solutionā¦.good luck to you
web proxy is a workable solution. Ā ;)
Yes it is, but i guess the end-users would expect it to work in a different way, maybe for developers is different.
I mean, if you buy a car to go for shopping, once you start your engine, there should not be a need to also call a taxi to towing you to the shop and backĀ :D -
The way it could work is to allow https for an internal clients host alias applied to a lan rule.
It will allow access to any https site too but skype will work.web proxy is a workable solution. Ā ;)
Actually, I also have web proxy configured which doesn't allow access by IP addresses and only handful of sites are allowed. Default rule for each group on squidguard being "DENY", which is not skype friendly. And I can't befriend skype inviting ALL friends and foes together.
I had studied skype's web-access logs and it works in multiple stages connecting to servers/hosts in a tiered manner as described on this wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_protocol. I tried to allow network ranges in the proxy as well (converting them to individual IPs, there were hundreds IPs in hundreds of ranges), which doesn't work reliably. Randomly clients were able to connect but most of the time could not because they tried to connect to some IPs which were not in the whitelist. This method was like a never ending wild goose chase. Add to that, the network ranges of Microsoft that Skype connects to since when MS has bought it.
When compared, I like GoToMyPC's documentation perfect for Network Administrators. They have provided all the IP ranges that you can use to selectively allow in your proxy or firewall.
-
Actually, I also have web proxy configured which doesn't allow access by IP addresses and only handful of sites are allowed. D
Try to just disable squidguard option to do not allow direct ip access in url.
-
Some time ago, I posted some info about L7 and Skype at http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=40558.0
-
Try to just disable squidguard option to do not allow direct ip access in url.
That is disabled Marcello. As I had mentioned earlier, only selective domains and URLs are allowed from my network. I do not want to do "ALLOW ALL", but only want to allow Skype to connect.
I understand that it is not possible anyhow, so I am considering this thread as closed.
-
Thanks Dhatz.
Some time ago, I posted some info about L7 and Skype at http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=40558.0
But this is not going to be of any help in my scenario, where I want to selectively allow Skype, POP3S, IMAPS, SMTPS, FTP, SSH, Jabber, HTTP/S but block everything else.
-
codemarauder,
I was with the same issue as yours and I solved It by doing this:
1- I've created a layer 7 rule that blocks http traffic.
2- Then I've granted access through ports 80 and 443 but applying the layer 7 filter created on step 1.
3- Note that I've placed the 7 layared rules at the end of the rules so it doesn't block other http "Pass" rules.
4- The last rule is a "Block" all traffic.
Hope it helpsā¦ let me know.
-
You've created a allow rule on port 80 blocking all http traffic? why? Ā ???
This l7 rule is able to filter ssl connections on 443?
-
marcelloc,
All of my HTTP traffic must go through proxy (3128) and I'm not using transparent proxy.
HTTPS through 443 was an concern, but it seams that the http layer 7 filter is blocking HTTPS as well.
My network is very restrictive and all out traffic must be allowed if It is the case.
-
ok, EntendiĀ :)
-
Hi, I've been using this solution as well, but 3 weeks ago, it stoped working. The PCs can't connect to Skype, it times out. Does anyone knows if the Skype Protocol was changed lately? Is there another way to allow Skype but block HTTP/HTTPS?
Thanks!
-
I have the same problem, with only 80 and 443 outbound open Skype doesn't work..
How did you solve?
