Cisco :: Firewall Blocking Users From Connecting From Outside?
Oct 5, 2012
I set up a cisco 2811 to replace a netgear router at the office. I have nat set up and with ccp I added a firewall on the router using the basic firewall wizard. Just about everything works internet, receiving and sending emails on exchange from the pc. Issue I'm having noone can access the company email on their phone.Also theres a camera system that would be accessible to view from the live feed from outside the office and my boss can't access the camera. I port mapped all the custom applications and added new traffic rule from self -> outzone. It didn't work tried to add one from outzone -> self or inzone but i get a prompt stating it only accepts protocols tcp,udp, sip, h323, icmp and a few other I can't think of. I'm pulling out my hair trying to get this to work everything worked seamlessly on the netgear router and nothing was really defined just the inbound ip address of the applications and protocols that are allowed.
Lets say for reference purposes my ip addresses for internet is
internet
55.34.23.43 /24
email server
192.168.10.252 /24
web cam application
192.168.10.10 /24
8000 in
8001 out
I am new at ASA 5520 and CSC module (version 6.3). I would like to know what configurations are possible for my network users if i use the CSC trend micro blocking using IP address or AD users, I know that i could select users/groups from the windows AD or select the IP addresses that i want to use for blocking or permit HTTP traffic (URL, etc).
My question is on the client side, how the CSC knows what AD users is the one that is requesting certain HTTP pages, or if i user a proxy server, i lose the IP/users options on the CSC??..or i could use authentication options on the proxy for example?.
I have been looking information about this but the manuals only explain the configuration options that i could configure on the CSC Trend Micro page, but it doesn't say which network environment i could use or need.
The original goal was to block "Mumble/Murmur" (a voip app) traffic, which runs on TCP/UDP 64738, both inbound and outbound, except to a certain host (63.223.117.170).
However, when nothing I tried seemed to make a difference, just to troubleshoot, I decided to try blocking all inbound traffic. I first disconnected ethernet port 0/0 to ensure that it was cabled correctly and the outside interface went down when I did. That worked as expected, so I confirmed I had the right interface and it was cabled correctly.
I then applied a "any any deny ip" rule as the first element in the outside interface access_list, as you can see below. However, it appears to have had no real effect and the hit count is very low (it should be astronomical).
show ver Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance Software Version 9.0(2) Device Manager Version 7.1(2) Compiled on Thu 21-Feb-13 13:10 by builders System image file is "disk0:/asa902-k8.bin"
I currently have a Cisco ACS 3415 appliance with 5.4. Coming from the ACS 4.2 world, I'm have a bit of a struggle creating the following and I was hoping if I could be shown clear steps I can duplicate the rest.
I want to creat a group ie: AIRTEMP with access time from 7:00am to 5:00pm and add 2 users to the group.
Users access our site using a vpn client connecting to a ASA5550. The ASA and the ACS already communicate with each other.
The ACS 5.4 user guide has me bouncing all over different page.
I am having problems with a customer's ASA 5505 with Anyconnect 3.1 - it is generating captive portal false-alerts which are stopping users from connecting. This issue began when I upgraded from Anyconnect 2.4 to 3.1, and it appears like this: A user downloads and installs the Anyconnect client and is able to connect fine, to begin with. However, once they reboot their computer and try to reconnect, the VPN session will not come up and they receive the error message below."The service provider in your current location is restricting access to the internet. You need to log on with the service provider before you can establish a VPN session. You can try this by visiting any website with your browser."
Reading other posts, it seems this message appears when a captive portal is restricting internet access. It must be a false alert in this case as there is nothing of the sort here. Apparently, Anyconnect 3.1 can generate a false alert like so if the name of the firewall's SSL certificate doesn't match the CName listed on the Client Profile. I've set this up to match, to no avail. Although users can connect by reauthenticating through the SSL VPN login web page, I am stumped as to how to get rid of this captive portal error that pops up when they try to use the Anyconnect client.
I have some problem with the ASA 5510 ver 7.0(6). My manager wants to keep this as backup. tried lots of things but still users not able to access internet nor can i ping anywhere.For example when i ping 4.2.2.2 i dont get any reply.The runing config is below for ur ref :
I have a normal setup of ASA5505 (without security license) connected behind an internet router. From the ASA5505 console I can ping the Internet. However, users behind the Firewall on the internal LAN, cannot ping the Internet even though NATing is configured. The users can ping the Inside interface of the Firewall so there is no internal reachability problem. In addition, I noticed that the NAT inside access list is not having any hit counts at all when users are trying to reach the internet.
When i replace the ASA5505 with a router with NAT overload configuration on it, the setup works normally and users are able to browse the internet.
The ASA5505 configuration is shown below.
hostname Firewall
interface Ethernet0/0 description Connected To Internet Router switchport access vlan 10
I have cisco ASA 5510 with ios version 7.07 & all users are browsing the internet via PAT through ASA. i want to block some sites/URLs like facebook, yahoo etc.
I purchased the license P/N: ASA-CSC20-250U-1Y with Description: ASA 5500 CSC-SSM-20 250-User License Only Renewal (1-year)
But I had a mistake because I need support to 500 users. Now, to solve my mistake I want to know Do I can purchase another ASA-CSC20-250U-1Y to provide the 500 users suppor?
I mean, ¿are two (2) ASA-CSC20-250U-1Y equivalent to the 500 user license listed below?P/N, ASA-CSC20-500U-1Y with Description: ASA 5500 CSC-SSM-20 500-User License Only Renewal (1-year)
I have ASA 5505 running 7.2.4, I want to prevent users accessing some web sites such as facebook , youtube and hotmail etc.
Which ASA 5505 IOS version should I use to block web access?
I don't want to isntall a dedicated filtering server ( websense etc) , I just want to block web sites statically on ASA 5505 via ASDM as I only have few sites to block.
know if ASA 5505 can do URL filtering, and what IOS is required ?
I have a Cisco ASA 5510. I have detected an infected workstation on my internal LAN which has caused my IP to be blacklisted by Barracuda Networks and other RBL. I have scanned and cleaned the workstation removing the spambot. I want to prevent all my internal workstations from sending SMTP traffic on Port 25 through my ASA 5510 device. I only need to allow my Exchange Server access to send out traffic on port 25. configure this setup using ASDM 5.0? I know it may be easier using CLI, but using the ASDM would really be preferred.
I am working on an ASA5505 and am trying to open the ftp port. I have a server (192.168.10.202) on the local LAN which is attempting to download antivirus updates from the net via ftp.
Saved : ASA Version 8.3(2) ! hostname SITE enable password XXXXXX passwd XXXXXX names
I purchased a SA520W for my company, and i have some probles for configuring firewall. I want to deny access to facebook, youtube and twitter but not for 4 hosts which needs this websites for work. I tried to configure content filtering > blocking URLs but with this solution, I deny acces for all users, So, I tried to make IP v4 rules :
The 4 hosts who may access to these websites are 192.168.50.124 to 127
Example : FROM Zone : LAN TO : WAN Service : Any Action: block always Source hosts : 192.168.50.32 to 192.168.50.123 destination hosts : 66.220.158.11 (one of the facebook's ip)
but it does not work. So, I am looking for an other solution, or maybe my rule is not correctly configured ?
networking but can understand with a bit of explanation.. I own a restaurant and provide free WiFi for my customers with a Cisco E2500, I am gettign bills that are through the roof, I contacted my ISP and was told users were accessing P2P downloads(uTorrent, etc.). How can I block these applications?
I am required to block the IP neworks used by approx 10 coutries. The issue is if using an ACL this works out to be about 18,000 lines, I have done all the summarization possible.. are there any other options? as the ASA 5505 crashes when implementing this many lines.
I've configured a Cisco ASA5520, i can access to internet and other applications in my office but when i sent an email from inside to outside and vis-versa, i can't receive emails in both side
I have a 1921 k9 router that has several DHCP pools configured. Before implementing the firewall they were all working. After implementing it they stopped working. I messed around and got the routed port GE0/1 handing out IP addresses and left it alone. Somehow it quit handing out IP addresses yesterday.I dont know if its a quick fix or not (getting DHCP working on the interfaces) but if any article that will walk me through getting DHCP working on all of the interfaces. [code]
I have an ASA 5505 running 8.4.I am only letting ICMP traffic in from the outside.As a test, I opened a couple of ports I need on the ASA.I cannot access these ports and I do not get a denied error in the log.
I contacted the ISP and they are not blocking these ports.I ran an online port scanner to check ports 1-100 as a test. They all came up as blocked on the port scanner. The only deny error I got on the ASA was for port 80.Is this normal behavior? If so, how do I get it to show all of the deny errors so I know the traffic is at least hitting the firewall?
How to block LogMeIn and GoToMyPC? We are using an ASA 5520. We mainly want to prevent people coming into our network using those applications. Also, our helpdesk uses LogMeIn Rescue and would need to allow that for them.
data centre hosted system with 4 servers connected to a CISCO ASA5505, everything was working fine with 4x windows server 2003 machines but since pulling 2 out and replacing them with windows server 2008 machines i get a flood of the error below and it blocks communications back to the IP listed which is the domain controller so naturally this makes the 2 new servers unusable.
1: they are all connected to the inside VLAN directly via the ASA's switch ports. 2: the are all in the same 255.255.255.0 subnet including the ASA inside interface 3: removing the gateway on the affected machines makes no difference the ASA continues to block it which indicates whether or not the machines use the asa as a gateway its inspecting the traffic and blocking. [code]
I have an SA520 that is being used as a front end firewall. Behind it I have an IP PBX. The VOIP provides are registered and I can make outgoing calls. However It appears that the SA520 is either blocking or not routing the calls. I have opened the ports recommended by both the IP PBX and the VOIP provider. What do I need to do to make incoming calls through the SA520?
Can we block websites and messenger on Cisco ASA 5520 running code 8.2 , we are looking to block facebook.com , yahoo.com , twitter.com , msn messenger, yahoo messenger, google talk and messenger. All Internet traffic from users are passing via the firewall and for 20 users on this site we do not have microsoft ISA or bluecoat.
We have a Cisco ASA 5510 with a CSC SSM 20 module installed. As of this morning a valid site (Public School System) is being blocked at my site. It says the site is of High risk. I have tried entering the site in the block list exceptions but it still comes up as a high risk site.
I have the following: redundant ASA5520s on v8.2(1)proxy server/web filter for blocking access to websites for staff/studentsusers who want to use SkypeCisco Catalyst 4507 corea dozen VLANs for staff/student/WiFi etcCisco core policy that routes 80/443 to transparent proxy on a WiFi VLAN Windows desktops have direct proxy settings in IE .Pretty much all outbound ports are closed with 80/443 and a handful of specifics for various things open. Because of this Skype attempts to use 80/443 which are sent to the proxy server but bnecause they're not HTTP/HTTPS they cannot be understood. Skype attitude is to open 1024-65535 which is just plain stupid!
There's no way to specify which port(s) Skype uses for outbound. I tried opening 33000-33099 which worked perfectly for 2-3 devices (Win laptop, iPad) but others failed all the time.I've seen people mention using an AIP-SSM module in the ASA for blocking Skype (and other things eg torrents). Is it possible to use this module to allow Skype eg on ports 1024-65535 whilst blocking any other application from using those ports?
I'm trying to configure a simple ACL to block smtp traffic from leaving my LAN -- basically prevent internal users from setting up internet email accounts in their email clients and sending through that smtp server. i want my Exchange server only to send smtp traffic. here's what i have:
-access-list 102 extended permit tcp host 10.10.1.29 eq smtp any eq smtp <===10.10.1.29 is Exchange
-access-list 102 extended deny tcp any eq smtp any eq smtp
-access-list 102 extended permit ip any any
-access-group 102 in interface inside
after i apply this ACL to the ASA, i am still able to send from my internet email address setup in Outlook using my "foreign" smtp server.
I have a LAN with several linux boxes (Fedora 17, both 32 and 64 bits), as well a a WInXP box. All of these are connected to the same switch, which is connected to the inside port of my PIX 515.
For a few sites (mozilla.org happens to be one of them), for http access, the tcp connection is established, but the "GET" request - or anything else for that matter - will not go through the PIX (from inside to wan). I have verified this by first, using wireshark to watch the packets being sent out from the client box, then by using the trace function in the PIX to see that the packets ARE arriving at the inside interface, but ARE NOT sent out of the wan interface.
This is for the linux boxes ONLY. When I do the same thing with my WinXP box, all works: in the PIX trace, I see the packets arrive at the inside interface, and leave the wan interace. And access to these sites are okay.
(What's a bit weird, although somewhat expected, when I connect my android phone to my LAN via WiFi, it too is unable to reach those sites - but then again, android is linux, right?)
In addition to the tracing, I have narrowed this problem down by connecting a linux box directly to my DSL router, then replacing the PIX with a simple router/gateway. Both of those solutions work.
Some background:
I have been using this PIX for about 10 years now, with the same configuration (except IP addresses). Only in the last several months has this problem started to show up.
I got this pix from a dead company at a really great price (free), so I'd like to keep it, and not have to spend money on something else. I don't have any support license, and have not been able to get any software upgrades. Here is its version info:
taz(config)# sho ver
Cisco PIX Firewall Version 6.2(2) Cisco PIX Device Manager Version 2.0(2)
I have a request for blocking urls using a class map. I have made this work with HTTP, however it does not work for https. This is a 2851 router with IOS Version 12.4(15)T7. I see i could use the command "match protocol secure-https" however this does not let me specify any specific urls.
Does a new IOS version will support what I'm trying to do? Or if there is another way?
We have a Cisco ASA 5510 with a CSC SSM 20 module installed. As of this morning a valid site (Public School System) is being blocked at my site. It says the site is of High risk. I have tried entering the site in the block list exceptions but it still comes up as a high risk site...
OK, I have a 2921 on 15.3-2T. ZBFW is working from the inside to the outside, but the DMZ is not being blocked at all to the inside. I am currently running with subinterfaces. All interfaces have zones attached. I have policies from inside to outside and DMZ to outside, those work fine. Without any policy from DMZ to inside, it can pass traffic freely from DMZ to inside. I have tried making an explicit policy to drop all to inside, still passes. I ended up just having to put an ACL on the interface
I already tried upgrading the IOS, that is how I ended up on the newest version. This is connected to a 2960S with a trunk port. Everything else works perfectly except for the DMZ security. I haven't had time to try to lab it up yet, but wanted to see if any reasons this shouldn't work, as all documentation says it should drop all traffic unless you make a policy to pass traffic.
I have a cisco ASA5505, it runs a wide site to site VPN network and has 4 servers connected to it
10.50.15.4 > fileserver 10.50.15.5 > domain controller (exchange) 10.50.15.6 > terminal server 10.50.15.7 > terminal server
Now yesterday i removed 10.50.15.6 and replaced it with a new terminal server with the same ip address, ever since the ASA is blocking traffic between it and the domain controller (example)
2Oct 27 201214:51:0510600710.50.15.655978DNSDeny inbound UDP from 10.50.15.6/55978 to 10.50.15.5/53 due to DNS Query What has me baffled is the only thing different between today and yesterday is the new server is windows server 2008 and the old one was windows server 2003. The new server has the same LAN ip address as the old one to make the changeover seamless for the users.
why all the sudden my ASA has decided to block the traffic between those machines? all the other machines can talk to it fine just not the domain controller, and seeing that this is a terminal server naturally you can see the problem i face!
this router has worked flawlessly for 2 years now without any config changes and i cant work out why its blocking traffic between those 2 machines.
