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

    DMZ

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    25 Posts 5 Posters 3.8k 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.
    • KOMK Offline
      KOM
      last edited by

      Each interface has a hidden Default Deny rule that you can envision as being at the very bottom of the list.  If no rules above it apply then the traffic is blocked.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • A Offline
        Atreides
        last edited by

        In that case, I was trying to set up a DMZ following instructions from here. Would this be working correctly as a DMZ? I want to be able to access the internet from the DMZ but have no access into any of my subnets. Do I need to change anything? I attached my rules below.

        wrath and lilan are hosts where wrath needs to access an NFS share on lilan. RFC1918 is 192.168.0.0/16, 172.16.0.0/12, and 10.0.0.0/8.

        20170117-092303.png
        20170117-092303.png_thumb

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • KOMK Offline
          KOM
          last edited by

          Considering how firewall rules are processed top-down first-match, your last rule will never hit since rule #4 allows all access to anywhere (including LAN).  Here is how I do it.  My DMZ servers need to talk to our LAN-based Zabbix server, and they need to get DNS from LAN, too.

          dmz.png
          dmz.png_thumb

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • A Offline
            Atreides
            last edited by

            Oh I see, I have been thinking about it backwards? When people say the rules are top down I thought that would mean that the last thing to be read would be the bottom, in my case blocking RFC1918. Instead I should be thinking about it based on priority? So the rules higher up are the rules that will be respected?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • D Offline
              doktornotor Banned
              last edited by

              First match wins (except for floating rules).

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • A Offline
                Atreides
                last edited by

                So, this better?

                20170117-rules.png
                20170117-rules.png_thumb

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • KOMK Offline
                  KOM
                  last edited by

                  I suspect not, if your pfSense DMZ interface is part of RFC1918.  Why not get rid of your last two rules and then just copy my last rule?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • A Offline
                    Atreides
                    last edited by

                    Well, I have many subnets… I guess I could block them all, but wont that be the same as I currently have?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • A Offline
                      Atreides
                      last edited by

                      Here's what i ended up with:

                      block-by-net.png_thumb
                      block-by-net.png

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • KOMK Offline
                        KOM
                        last edited by

                        Still no good.  Your 4th rule allows all access to anywhere.  Delete it entirely.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • jahonixJ Offline
                          jahonix
                          last edited by

                          You have lots of "allow BUT" rules, the ones with "!". Doesn't make sense.
                          Either make them block that range OR make them allow it but NOT "allow all but…"

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • jahonixJ Offline
                            jahonix
                            last edited by

                            @KOM:

                            … just copy my last rule?

                            Problem is that it works but is harder to follow than need be.
                            Blocking something with an allow rule seems … strange.

                            Better use one rule first to explicitly block * to LAN
                            Add another rule to allow * to world.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • A Offline
                              Atreides
                              last edited by

                              @jahonix:

                              @KOM:

                              … just copy my last rule?

                              Problem is that it works but is harder to follow than need be.
                              Blocking something with an allow rule seems … strange.

                              Better use one rule first to explicitly block * to LAN
                              Add another rule to allow * to world.

                              Yea, this is what I wanted to do originally.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • A Offline
                                Atreides
                                last edited by

                                @Atreides:

                                So, this better?

                                Doesn't my earlier post above accomplish that?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • jahonixJ Offline
                                  jahonix
                                  last edited by

                                  It does.
                                  Don't know what problems KOM had with it, I'd do it that way.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • A Offline
                                    Atreides
                                    last edited by

                                    @jahonix:

                                    It does.
                                    Don't know what problems KOM had with it, I'd do it that way.

                                    Great! That is why I was confused. I'll try that.

                                    Thanks everyone.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • KOMK Offline
                                      KOM
                                      last edited by

                                      Your first ruleset allowed access everywhere before the LAN block.  Your second ruleset has you blocking all private IP space and not just LAN.  Your 3rd ruleset allowed everything before the blocks.

                                      Second ruleset would do the job but the block is overly broad, and this can potentially impact you down the road if you add any interfaces or VLANs.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • A Offline
                                        Atreides
                                        last edited by

                                        @KOM:

                                        Your first ruleset allowed access everywhere before the LAN block.  Your second ruleset has you blocking all private IP space and not just LAN.  Your 3rd ruleset allowed everything before the blocks.

                                        Second ruleset would do the job but the block is overly broad, and this can potentially impact you down the road if you add any interfaces or VLANs.

                                        How so? The DMZ shouldn't have access to any other VLANS/interfaces.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • KOMK Offline
                                          KOM
                                          last edited by

                                          How so? The DMZ shouldn't have access to any other VLANS/interfaces.

                                          Sure, until you add one for some reason and then need access from DMZ to LAN (for custom DNS, for example) and can't figure out why things aren't working.  If you only have the LAN and DMZ then you could just as easily used LAN net instead of your RFC1918 alias.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • jahonixJ Offline
                                            jahonix
                                            last edited by

                                            @KOM:

                                            …If you only have the LAN and DMZ ...

                                            @Atreides:

                                            Well, I have many subnets…

                                            He doesn't and he told us.
                                            No need to complicate things with what could happen in the future. KISS.

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