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

    Force port 53/853 to local pfSense DNS resovler

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved DHCP and DNS
    13 Posts 4 Posters 2.9k 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.
    • R
      rtfmoz
      last edited by

      Using an ERPoe-5 and the goal is to capture any outbound traffic from the LAN (192.168.0/24) on port 53/853 that's not from my DNS server (.170) and forward it to the DNS server. The server is a pfSense DNS resolver running pfBlockerNG-devel for DNSBL to block groups of sites. I have the following configuration setup and I am wondering if there is a better way to achieve this.

      3a88b630-0fa1-4761-b096-33f8269da905-image.png

      V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • V
        viragomann @rtfmoz
        last edited by

        @rtfmoz
        Don't see the sense of the rule for DNS exclusions sources, since the translation is the same as for any source.

        It might be more reliable to put the DNS server into a separate network segment than doing masquerading on the whole traffic. But when forwarding from LAN to LAN this will be necessary.

        johnpozJ R 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • johnpozJ
          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @viragomann
          last edited by

          Redirection of dot is almost never going to work - because the client should be validating the cert. And your dns is not going to pass that validation.

          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • AndyRHA
            AndyRH
            last edited by

            I did something similar using PiHole as the DNS servers. It works well and silently forces hard coded systems (Roku) to use my DNS. I posted the instructions to use PiHole.

            https://forum.netgate.com/topic/156453/pfsense-dns-redirect-to-local-dns-server?_=1627566532678

            o||||o
            7100-1u

            johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • johnpozJ
              johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @AndyRH
              last edited by

              Redirecting normal dns on 53 is quite simple.. But trying to redirect dot (dns using tls over port 853) is not.. Because the client should validate the cert is for the fqdn of the dot server wanting to talk to, and that its a trusted cert.

              This is not going to be the case with redirection of this traffic your local dns. While mitm is possible with dot, its more involved than simple redirection.

              An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
              If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
              Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
              SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

              R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • R
                rtfmoz @viragomann
                last edited by

                This post is deleted!
                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • R
                  rtfmoz @viragomann
                  last edited by

                  @viragomann said in Force port 53/853 to local pfSense DNS resovler:

                  @rtfmoz
                  Don't see the sense of the rule for DNS exclusions sources, since the translation is the same as for any source.

                  Rules 3 and 4 have switch0 as the source and the DNS server is on the same LAN=switch0, so I dont want to create a port forward loop.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • R
                    rtfmoz @johnpoz
                    last edited by rtfmoz

                    @johnpoz said in Force port 53/853 to local pfSense DNS resovler:

                    Redirecting normal dns on 53 is quite simple.. But trying to redirect dot (dns using tls over port 853) is not.. Because the client should validate the cert is for the fqdn of the dot server wanting to talk to, and that its a trusted cert.

                    This is not going to be the case with redirection of this traffic your local dns. While mitm is possible with dot, its more involved than simple redirection.

                    Yes I understand the problem is I need to read the DNS packet to determine that and I cannot open up a TLS connection. So all I have left is the IP address. This means I need to add the anycast IP of the root servers to a group and exclude them from the redirection. Would that solve the issue you think?

                    1d3973e0-cfb1-4db8-a7b2-027acaca9b1a-image.png

                    R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • R
                      rtfmoz @rtfmoz
                      last edited by rtfmoz

                      Oh wait... when you say dot, do you mean "." or are you are referring to dns over tls?

                      johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • johnpozJ
                        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @rtfmoz
                        last edited by johnpoz

                        what I mean by dot is (dns over tls) if you think you can just redirect that.. You need to do a bit more research on what that is that is for sure..

                        Redirecting port 853 dns is not really a thing.

                        An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                        If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                        Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                        SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                        R johnpozJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • R
                          rtfmoz @johnpoz
                          last edited by rtfmoz

                          This post is deleted!
                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • johnpozJ
                            johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @johnpoz
                            last edited by johnpoz

                            You would go about it by setting whatever the fqdn the client is trying to use to point to the IP of the dns that is hosting the dot dns.. Or by redirecting an IP it has hard coded to your IP, etc.

                            Now if you have a cert with that cn, or san that matches that fqdn, and the client will trust the CA you created that cert from - there you go mitm.

                            Depending on the client you might not be able to edit what CAs it trusts - so it could prove to be almost impossible, etc.

                            If you have all that understanding of how TLS works, why would you think you could just redirect dot then?

                            An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                            If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                            Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                            SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                            R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • R
                              rtfmoz @johnpoz
                              last edited by

                              I initially thought you were just referring the root domain server list aka “.” so I just didn’t redirect them. When it comes to SSL certs validation rules always apply.

                              But if you saying the CN is not tied to the domain of the DNS lookup then mitm is no problem with a trusted CA deployment. I just got that impression from what you said above

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