I need to configure hosts to route their network packets in a way that they pass another specific server (in my own network) before they reach their destination.
An example network setup can be seen at the following link which was provided by StackOverflow:
I have two hosts (Host-1 and Host-2) which communicate with each other over a Gateway/Router in a star network. The specific server (called NetEM-Host) is needed for NetEM manipulation and also connected to the Gateway.
Now, every packet that the two hosts send needs to be first routed over NetEM-Host and only afterwards reach its destination.
How can I configure the network in this way, without altering the Gateway?
(FYI: The Gateway was configured by OpenStack and I cannot SSH on it to change things.)
I was thinking about altering the routing table ("route") of Host-1 and Host-2 but the NetEM-Host would not be the next-hop for the two hosts and thus I cannot define it there, am I correct? Any suggestions are welcomed!
Related
Been googling it for a while and can't figure out the answer: suppose I have two containers inside a pod, and one has to send the other some secrets. Should I use https or is it safe to do it over http? If I understand correctly, the traffic inside a pod is firewalled anyway, so you can't eavesdrop on the traffic from outside the pod. So... no need for https?
Containers inside a Pod communicate using the loopback network interface, localhost.
TCP packets would get routed back at IP layer itself, if the address is localhost.
It is implemented entirely within the operating system's networking software and passes no packets to any network interface controller. Any traffic that a computer program sends to a loopback IP address is simply and immediately passed back up the network software stack as if it had been received from another device.
So when communication among Containers inside a Pod, it is not possible to get hijacked/ altered.
If you want to understand more, take a look understanding-kubernetes-networking
Hope it answers your question
In http the client supplies the hostname it used to connect to the service with. Now, for bare TCP connections, is there something similar one can do? My scenario is I have a service that has multiple open TCP ports and that works fine, but for convenience I would like to use the same port and subdomains. Is there any layer I can add on top (like a load balancer), or change the service? I have control over most things, basically anything goes.
Example:
Today I can connect to two TCP services like so: foobar.com:1001 and foobar.com:1002. Is it possible to have e.g. service-1.foobar.com:1000 go to foobar.com:1001 and service-2.foobar.com:1000 go to foobar.com:1002.
Different services can bind to same port but on different IP. Hence different domains shall resolve to different IPs : Port combination [where Port is same for all services]. And you can use Proxy service as from HA Proxy to route connections to final destination.
If I understand your question correctly based on your example then no it is not possible. In this case, there is no difference between an HTTP and TCP connection.
In both cases, the hostname is simply resolved to an ip address. If you setup DNS resolution for foobar.com, service-1.foobar.com, service-2.foobar.com to point to the same ip address then they will all go to the same machine.
I have at times needed to have a service running on a different port internally than it is accessible externally. For that, if you are running on Linux, you can simply use iptables to do the port forwarding.
You can find other stack overflow questions/answers for setting up the port forwarding.
https://serverfault.com/questions/140622/how-can-i-port-forward-with-iptables
I have two applications (diy container type) which have to be connected via TCP. Let's take as example application clusternode1 and clusternode2.
Each one has TCP listener set up for $OPENSHIFT_DIY_IP:$OPENSHIFT_DIY_PORT.
For some reason clusternode1 fails to connect to any of the following options for clusternode2:
$OPENSHIFT_DIY_IP:$OPENSHIFT_DIY_PORT
$OPENSHIFT_APP_DNS
Can you please help in understanding what should be url for external TCP connection?
You might check the logs to see if the OPENSHIFT_DIY_IP for both apps are within the same subnet. If one, say, is...
1.2.3.4
...and the other is...
1.5.6.7
...for example, then you might not expect Amazon's firewalls to just arbitrarily allow TCP traffic from one subnet to another. If this were allowed by default then one person's app might try to hack another's.
I know that when you're dealing directly with Amazon AWS and you spin up multiple virtual servers you have to create virtual zones to allow traffic between them. This might be something that's necessary.
Proxy Ports I don't know if this is useful but it's possible that a private IP address is being bound to your application(s) and then a NAT server is translating that into a public IP address.
I know that ipchicken.com will tell you your router's ip address and the port it is using for your connection. But can this information be obtained "locally"? (Without relying on a website).
What I want it for is establishing a connection between two random hosts...without a "dedicated server" in the middle. My problem is to reach through the NAT. I think the best bet is a kind of TCP hole punching, where both hosts connect somewhere and then just tell each other (it can be by phone or chat or similar) the current ip address and the port number their routers are using. It should trick the routers into forwarding the packets to the hosts, albeit coming from a different source than they originally connected to.
Is it possible to find the port number your router is using to patch you through in a more local manner than ipchicken.com?
Are there any ideas on other possible approaches to this problem?
EDIT: Setting port forwarding on the router is not an option in this case, as many people (including me) do not have admin powers over their routers and I do not want to impose such a task on the "users" of my application
The router would use a different source port for every outgoing connection, so checking based on an outgoing connection will not work for your use case.
For an incoming connection, i.e., if you want to reach a specific machine behind a NAT device (like a home router), you'll have to explicitly open up some ports on the router and set up forwarding rules. The router would then listen for incoming connections on that port and forward it to a machine:port based on the configured rule.
How you do this would depend on the specific router make/model. Search the web or logon to the admin interface and look around, it should be easy to find. However make sure you understand the security implications of opening up a port on your router!
UPDATE based on edited question:
Without port-forwarding and if both devices are behind NAT, your only solution is to have an intermediary server! If only one of them is behind NAT, you can have that machine initiate the connection.
You could use a Stun server as the external globally reachable server.
We meet a testing scenario which needs to tamper with source IP address of a Http request to simulate clients coming from different countries. Do you know any tool help on this?
Last but not least, our web site is built with ASP.NET.
Thanks.
In a test environment it usually isn't difficult. First read this SO question about virtual network interfaces.
If the server and client are on the same machine, all you have to do is figure out how to get your client software to bind to your virtual interface.
wget for instance has the --bind-address option to specify which local address to bind to. Web browsers are a bit more difficult to do this with; you may need to just run it in a VM.
If your server and client are on the same LAN, you just need to configure your router with some static routes to your client machine. In this case you probably don't need a virtual network interface, just set a static IP for your client machine; as long as the gateway is set up correctly it should be able to send packets to the server, and as long as the route is set up correctly the replies should find their way back to the client.
If the client and server are separated by an internet, it's rather more difficult. One option is to set up a network tunnel endpoint on the server and tunnel it to the client machine, which "knows" that it has the virtual network interface.
As noted in answers to the ServerFault question "Are IP addresses trivial to forge", you cannot easily forge source addresses in a protocol that required two way communication (e.g. TCP). Note that this "two way communication" is required at the packet level. You cannot just say "no problem, I want to send requests and ignore HTTP responses." To establish a TCP session, you need to receive data. Your best bet is to use a proxy server.
I am unsure if the IP standard allows for this, but if you are working in a Lab environment, where you don't need internet connectivity during the test, I can see it working under following circumstances:
Basically, I would set the server's network interface to use netmask 0.0.0.0 and flush the rest of the routing table.
Then you could configure a client machine to take on any IP address as long as you use netmask 0.0.0.0. And two-way communication should be possible.
Server[1.2.3.4/0] <---> Client[x.x.x.x/0]
But please bear with me. I haven't tested this, so I could be wrong :-)
If you have access to your infrastructure, you can add an interface off the router and then place a static route on the router to that network.
Server-----Router----Internet
/
Test_PC----/
Alternatively you can look into PBR (Policy Based Routing) and on the routers you can flag source packets and change the source on the fly, so your server will think they are coming from where you'd like them to come from.
Server-------------Router_with_PBR-------------Internet----- PC
SCR:4.2.2.2 Change SCR:6.6.6.6 to 4.2.2.2 6.6.6.6
But you have to ask yourself why do you want to see when packets come from different countries. Some countries have massive proxy servers that filter access ( "Great Firewall of China"), so the above tests will not prove much.
Your best bet then is using proxy servers or if your looking for a long term solution then setup a server (virtual is great for this) and use RDP for testing. I'm sure you can rent a virtual server somewhere for a month or two.
That's not possible. Because when you forge the ip address, the response is never going to come back, which is required for http.
The best way is to use proxies. See also this question on serverfault.
If you change your source IP address, that means no traffic from your web server will be able to reach back to the client.
You might be able to use some kind of proxy and/or address translation filter to do the remapping while still allowing two-way communication.