Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

restrict Tor allow-rules to WAN-outbound traffic only #520

Open
torinthiel opened this issue Nov 15, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

restrict Tor allow-rules to WAN-outbound traffic only #520

torinthiel opened this issue Nov 15, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@torinthiel
Copy link

Expected behavior

Firewall rules are not redundant and as tight as possible.

Actual behavior

The rules for OPNSense firewall, App server network (interface OPT1) first block all traffic from OPT1 interface to LAN and OPT2 interface (rules 3 and 4 respectively), and later allow TCP traffic from OPT1 to all destinations (rule 5). Given that at this point the only remaining interface is WAN, and that OPNSense defaults to block unmatched traffic, wouldn't it be easier to drop rules 3 & 4 and tighten down rule 5 to only allow traffic to WAN interface? This would also help future-proofing in case of firewalls with more interfaces.

Additional information

There's a similar issue with OPT2 firewall rules.

@cfm cfm self-assigned this Jan 11, 2024
@cfm cfm changed the title Redundant/incorrect entries in OPNSense App server network (OPT1) firewall rules restrict Tor allow-rules to WAN-outbound traffic only Jan 11, 2024
@cfm
Copy link
Member

cfm commented Jan 11, 2024

In general, I think we've tried to make the firewall rules as explicit as they can be, so that it's possible to reason about their interactions at the interface level, without needing to recall the firewall's default behavior (or trust that it hasn't been changed).

However, I think you're right that we can further tighten the allow-rules for Tor to WAN-outbound traffic. I've retitled this ticket for this goal. Please let me know if I'm not fully responding to your suggestion here!

@cfm cfm removed their assignment Jan 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants