I've been working on an application recently that practice ACL configuration, and since finishing I figured it should be put on the internet as there wasnt much more work to do to make it suitable for a website. It allows you to practice both standard and extended ACL configuration by generating a random number of ACL actions for you to configure, and provides the correct config to compare yours against to see if you were correct. It also emulates a router at a very basic level to allow practice when there is no equipment available.
How can I NAT the same set of four hosts and give them access to two different networks across an IPSEC site-to-site VPN tunnel? I'm using an ASA5520 running 8.04.
I am copying files form one server to another using Bightserv ARCserve Backup, now the files copy over however the access control list to the files isn't.Does anybody no away around this?
I have an extended acl on my VLAN interface in bound and it is working like I need it to, securing one side of my network from the other allowing only what I want from my desktops to my servers. The acls look something like this:
Traffic is initiated from vlan100 not from vlan70 then back through so an established rule does not work. Also there are many more ports open in my inbound acl but this is simplified for ease of reading.I want to make sure if I place both an inbound and outbound rule on my vlan and that it is in the right place, both on the same vlan.
I have a sip gateway (AS5400) that is used to connect sip providers to our internal voice network.Internal gateway (10.1.1.2 LAN) -- SIP trunk -- AS5400 (10.1.1.3 LAN/ 8.23.23.43 WAN) -- SIP trunk -- Internet SIP Provider We encountered the following problem :A SIP call from internal gateway to the sip provider could establish but was muted on our side (sip provider could hear us)On the WAN interface of the AS5400, there is a ACL that filter traffic IN coming from SIP Provider
interface GigabitEthernet0/0 ip address 8.23.23.43 255.255.255.224 ip access-group 101 in
I log the deny on this ACL and I saw some udp packets denied with LAN addresses !*Mar 3 15:24:44.001: %SEC-6-IPACCESSLOGP: list 101 denied udp 10.1.1.3(0) -> 10.1.1.2 (0), 1 packet I did not bind anything on the sip config.When I changed the ACLs, calls went well.Why do I see LAN packets on the WAN interface ?
I am having some issues with creating an ACL for my gateway router.I want to block external access to my network 192.168.1.0/24 from internet so i set up the ACL on the WAN port of my 7200 router asI am using named extened access list -
{ deny ip any 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 log permit ip any any } and i applied this inbound accesslist on the WAN port of router as "ip access-group acl-in in"
Now i have blocked the external traffic to my network 192.168.1.0/24 but the issue i am having is i am also unable to reach outside now. All i want is to block external traffic on the router WAN port but allow internal traffic to outside. Did i miss anything in the access list?
We have WLC 4402 and LWAP 1510In access control list menu, all needed rule added and the last rule deny any to any We use Ethernet bridging on LWAP and some clients connect with wire network that associated with Ethernet bridge LWAP, Now when deny rule applied the client that connect with wired network couldn't established VPN connection or another service to the routing and remote server, I create rule that permit any to routing and remote server.
I have an ASA pair configured to replace a router that hosts a collection of IPSec Tunnels. Tunnels appear to work. I am lab'ing some additional controls that I would like to implement. On the Production Router that i plan to replace with the ASA's the current Tunnels are all wide open (all traffic allowed to pass). I was hoping to lock things down a little without having to reconfigure all of the Tunnels. My though was that an ACL on the Inside Interface blocking selected traffic Out (so into the LAN) should not impact the stability of the Tunnels but allow me to restrict some traffic from entering the LAN. One port that I was attempting to block is RDP 3389. When this ACL is applied to the inside interface it does not block Port 3389 at all. What am I missing? Is it that the trffic is being allowed because it is coming through one of my 'open' Tunnels?
Shouldn't IPSec Tunnel traffic be processed by the Inside Interface ACL just like all other traffic?
I'm trying to limit my kids' access to the internet during the night, since I caught them plugging their laptops and the Xbox into the router's Ethernet ports late at night so they could circumvent the wireless guest access. The problem is, I only have 5 available control slots and the list of devices I browse to choose from is vague at best. Half of the devices listed in parental controls say "Network Device" and the other half say "iPhone" or "iPad". Isn't there an easy way to choose the correct devices to restrict, like by IP or MAC address? And if not, why is this so confusing and difficult? I have a family of 10 in my house and everyone is connecting with their own phn or 3 iPads, 2 laptops, 2 desktop PCs, 1 Xbox and 1 PS3.I tried limiting the DHCP Reservation list, but that seems to only affect the wireless access, not the 4 ethernet port connections.
I have a requirement to create a site to site vpn tunnel on ASA 5510 from a remote site to my HO, ihave already other site-to-site tunnels are up and running on the ASA.The issue is my remote site has got the network address which falls in one of the subnet used in HO(192.168.10.0/24).My requirement is only My remote site need to accees couple of my servers in HO which is in 192.168.200.0/24 subnet.
Our Headquarter (asa 5510) is running a site to site vpn connection with a Branch office (router 2811). All remote users are accesing the internet through the VPN and also accesing headquarter file servers.I want to know if there is a way for some remote users to be able to use the vpn for accesing the file servers but to access the internet through the branch office. The rest of the remote users will be still accessing the internet through VPN.
I've setup a site to site vpn on an ASA 5510 using ASDM (as I have many times before) and the tunnel appears to be up but I am not able to pass traffic. When I run the packet tracer from my inside network to the remote destination network, it shows that it is blocked by the implicit deny ip any any rule on my inside incoming access list.
we have two ASA 5510s one in 8.4(4) and one in 8.2(5) in a site-to-site VPN setup. All internal traffic is working smoothly.Site/Subnet A: 192.160.0.0 - local (8.4(4)) Site/Subnet B: 192.260.0.0 - remote (8.2(5)) VPN Users: 192.160.40.0 - assigned by ASA When you VPN into the network, all traffic hits Site A, and everything on subnet A is accessible.
Site B however, is completely inaccessible for VPN users. All machines on subnet B, the firewall itself, etc... is not reachable by ping or otherwise.There are also some weird NAT rules that I am not happy with that were created after I upgraded Site A ASA to 8.4
Site A internal: 192.160.x.x External: 55.55.555.201(main)/202(mail) Site B (over site-to-site) is 192.260.x.x External: 66.66.666.54(all)
I pretty much just have the basic NAT rules for VPN, Email, Internet and the site-to-site.What do I need to add for the VPN to be able to access the site-to-site network?
Recently I used the wizard to create an IPsec site-to-site connection, which went very smoothly; however, I now noticed that when I connect via Anyconnect 2.5.0217 I cannot get to local and subnatted resources on the network.
I rolled back to saved config file, which was taken before the site-to-site vpn was created, but that did not work as well.What should I check to see why I can no longer get to different subnets after the site-to-site vpn connection.
I am try to configure ASA 5510 with 8.3 IOS version.My internal users are 192.168.2.0/24 and i configured dynamic PAT and are all internet .
i want configure identity NAT for remote access VPN.Remote users IP pool is 10.10.10.0 to 10.10.10.10
i know to configure NAT exemption in IOS 7.2 version. But here IOS 8.3 version. configure NAT exemption for 192.168.2.0/24 to my remote pool( 10.10.10.0 to 10.10.10.10).
We have a client that has a Cisco 1801W Firewall that is setup as a site to site VPN terminating to a Cisco ASA 5505. The tunnel is up and established, I can ping from both sides of the tunnel.
The problem is the clients behind the Cisco ASA (192.168.2.x) cannot reach certain ports behind the Router (192.168.1.x). The main thing we're trying to do is browse via UNC path (ex: \192.168.1.120 from a 192.168.2.x machine).
I got 3389 working after I changed the - ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.120 3389 y.y.x.x 3389 route-map DM_RMAP_1 extendable Modified the command to include the public IP instead of interface FastEthernet0
I believe it has something to do with the way NAT and route-maps are setup currently but I'm not familar enough with them to make the changes. I worked with Cisco to ensure the VPN tunnel was fine and it's something security related on the Router.
Here is the configuration (removed a few lines not necessary. y.y.x.x = WAN IP of Router x.x.y.y = WAN IP of ASA).
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 23648 bytes ! version 12.4 no service pad
I have a ASA 5510 that has multiple site to site VPNs. I need to create an additiona site to site VPN but only allow 1 host to access and traverse the tunnel. The network is on a 192.168.5.x but the host that will need to access this tunnel needs to be on a 172.16.33.x network. I dont want any other traffic allowed to access or traverse the VPN tunnel for this host. How can I set this up?
I have a Cisco 2911 router configured with a couple of VPN tunnels . The issue that I am having is that I cannot access the servers (WEB,EMIL) thru the tunnel . After looking around found out that adding a route-map to my static NAT rule will fix the issue . Once I do that I am able to access the serves thru the VPN but my local machines lose internet access .So I have to delete the access list The issue seems to be with the Access list 110 permit ip [code]
I have a cisco ASA 5510 at the branch here. It terminates about 8 vpn tunnels and also it supports remote access clients. I just have a quick question. Can my remote sub-net group access the other remote access site-site VPN subnet group. If yes then how should i configure it.
Can I use a single Public IP address for both Internet access and site to site vpn access?If not, can I configure the RV220W as a bridge and still use it via another gateway configured for vpn passthrough as a VPN appliance/server on the LAN?
I am attempting to configure Radius authentication accross a site-to-site VPN for my ASA 5510-01 for remote access.
ASA5510-1 currently has a live site to site to ASA5510-2.
ASA 5510-1 - 10.192.0.253
ASA 5510-2 - 172.16.102.1
DC - 172.16.102.10
ASA5510-01 can ping the DC and vica versa but is unable to authticate when i perform a test. ASA5510-01 can authenticate to a DC on it;s own LAN but not on the remote LAN that DC sits on.
I have double checked the 'Server Secret Key' and ports as well as various users which all work locallly. ASA5510-02 authenticates to DC with no problems.
Have asa 5520 ver 8.0(4) I have vpn client access created and working I have l2l vpn created and working with another set of asa The issue at hand VPN client from internet connects and authenticates, this client can access Site A's networks with no problems. However vpn client on Site A ASA can not access Networks through l2l tunnel located at Site B.
we set up a site-to-site-vpn between a 5505 and a 5510 (both asa8.3.1). We configured both sides using the VPN-Wizard in the ASDM. When we try to ping from the network behind the 5505 (192.168.45.0/24) to any host behind the 5510 (192.168.0.0/24) the tunnel gets established but the ping doesn't get trough. After that we tried to connect via RDP to any host behind the 5510 and it worked well (same with ssh, telnet,vnc etc.). Now we want to map a network-share on a 2008-Server behind the 5510 but it's not working. In the ASDM-Log I see some "denied by inside-access in"-messages for the ports 139 and 445. Isn't it right that the whole traffic in the vpn-tunnel bypasses the acl? Even if we open both ports we can't connect to the network-share?
I'm attempting to configure an for both site-to-site and remote access VPNs. The site-to-site is working fine, however when I connect using the Cisco client, after initial connection and password prompt I get a "not connected" status. The log states that a policy map match could not be found. I have successfully set the unit up for remote access with no site-to-site and ran into another host of issues when adding the site-to-site to the working remote access config, so I started over setting up site-to-site first. I've attempted this through ADSM (hate it) - the current configuration is via CLI. I'm certain I'm just missing a piece or two.
I am considering to buy two RV180Ws and place them on two separate locations. But before buying I would like to make sure that the units meets my requirements. Lets call the locations A and B. I would like to connect location A with full network access to location B. But at the same time I would like to have that location B also gets full access to the network at location A.Besides this I would like to be able to connect to one of the networks from remote with my laptop.Preferably all connections should be made using IPSEC and not PPTP.I would like to know if it is possible to make such a configuration, and eventually if there is a smarter way to do e.g. only letting clients connect to location A or B and granting them access to all ressources at both location A and B from there.
I am trying to configure my network so that VPN traffic is only routed to a single physical port on the RV180 or to a certain subset of devices on a network.
I have a site-to-site vpn setup in a home office and am connecting to the corporate network. The user has a couple of devices running on the home network that need access to the corporate network.
We are hoping to leave his PC accessible to his home network as well as the corporate network, but restrict other devices from accessing the vpn.
I beleive I could do it by playing with the subnet but I can't get my head around it.
We have a Cisco ASA 5510 at our main office that makes connection with a 5505 at our other office using site to site VPN. (works)
Now for the question,
we want to access our other office from the main office but we wont want them to have access to our servers etc. so basically we want to control them but they shouldn't have the rights to control us.
Is this possible with a site to site VPN? and how to do it.
Our HQ office has an ASA 5510 with full access to internal and external IP's. We have a small group of remote users that are working from a shared office suite and they only have Internet access by way of internal default gateway. Using a VPN client is not desirable due to many other devices requiring access to HQ. Is there a way to create a site-to-site VPN from this remote office space back to HQ (ASA 5510) if they have no access to the public IP address on their end?
I have recently upgraded from a Cisco Pix 515E to a Cisco ASA 5512-X.
I am obviously having trouble considering the changes implemented in 8.2. I have set up the wan and lans appropriately, as well as the VPN's. Everything is working at my location, and the VPN's are established as well.
I would like to be able to have full access in between all three VPN's and my location considering our web, email, DVR, and database servers are here.
I can't seem to ping or access my off site routers GUI pages the way I can with the PIX.
When I establish the mirrored rules on the firewall, I am able to do these things, but I lose internet at my current location.
I have problem with accessing servers through site-to-site vpn from ASA which makes this site-to-site vpn and has enablerd Clientless VPN.Reason why I need it / What I need to do:ASA 5510 has enabled Clientless VPN and on this portal is allowed users to go to URL of internal servers through bookmars. We are using it when somebody could not access IPSec VPN or is in internet cafe. So this user logs into clientless vpn and click on bookmark to access mail server for exmaple. But there is problem, asa cannot access this server through site-to-site VPN.
Network:Here is quick design of my network.I don't have problem access server in VLAN 159 from VLAN 10 or 100. But I need to be able access servers in Vlan 159 from ASA 5510 which has IP address 192.168.1.4.I have this subnet which ASA belongs in BEFORE-NAT object in same place as VLAN 10, 100 are and in Site-to-Site vpn profile.
