Guest User!

You are not Sophos Staff.

This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

FTP Passive External XG115 SFOS 18.0.5 MR-5

Hello,

I would like help to configure the operation of a government application, which works as FTP passive.

And for tests, I even applied the rule as follows:

source: 192.168.240.3
destination: 201.55.60.68

Services: Any
Source zones: Any
Destination zones: Any

SNAT MASQ applied.

However, access does not work completely.

Because according to the status of the application.

The request arrives at the server 201.55.60.68
because it reports status of connected to the FTP server.

However, the rest of the traffic and server response does not arrive at the origin as desired.

And looking at the logs on the firewall, I worry if it's a bug or something. Because connection response logs are shown before initial query logs. So the rule ID and NAT match the initial rule. But these logs do not show any interface and the following error: Invalid connection helper.

And only after the request log appears. With the initial meaning of the rule.

Ignoring the order of viewing the logs.

I imagine maybe because it's a FTP passive and the firewall is statefull.
After the request whose address is client to server. The server sends a request to the client. And the firewall, in turn, would be waiting for a response and not a request, for this connection.

So I'm in doubt if there is any way to make this FTP passive configuration.



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents Reply Children
  • Hi,

    Thanks.
    The command worked with the FTP scan web filter disabled.

    At this point, by the command I don't explicitly see that FTP bounce would be disabled. But apparently switching protection mode. (I just think, on account of not seeing off, disable, etc in the command)

    So I'm in doubt, which vulnerabilities would be exposed as a result of the change?

  • Personally i would not open any FTP service to external. To many vulnerabilities open and there are enough valid sharing solutions (like onedrive, dropbox etc.). So why bother with offering a solution inhouse and exposing a service, which could potentially be exploited? 

    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  • It's because it's government application. In which it connects to the FTP server to check and update it. And at this point, generally the government doesn't care about the safest and most correct way to make applications.

    However, at this point I understood what you meant. In short, using FTP by itself is a risk.

    However, thank you very much for your help.