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

VPN Traffic Dropped but VPN protocols explicitly enabled in firewall rules

Hi,

I read Rulz, but I am still having difficulty understanding what's going on. I am trying to enable VPN services such as WiTopia and VPN unlimited, (which use IPsec and OpenVPN respectively, as far as I know).

I created a firewall rule for the entire internal network to allow VPN protocols out. VPN services still do not function, however, and I can see the attempted connections getting dropped. It does not APPEAR to be intrusion prevention, but that remains to be seen. 

The firewall rule I created is:

  • Sources: Internal (Network)
  • Services: VPN Protocols
  • Destinations: Any
  • Action: Allow
  • Time Period: Always
  • Log Traffic: checked
  • Source Mac Addresses: none

And the rule is enabled.

 

In order on Intrusion Protection page:

  • Global - IPS status enabled, Local networks = Internal (Network) only, policy/restart policy = drop silently/drop all packets
  • Attack Patterns - everything checked, everything dropped
  • Anti-DOS/Flooding - no options checked
  • Anti-portscan - Enabled, Log event only, limit logging
  • Exceptions: none
  • Advanced: nothing added here (everything is blank)

I am not really sure where to look next. It's highly possible I am misunderstanding how attack patterns work, but there is nothing obvious to me as to why the VPN connections are being dropped.

Also, I AM blocking most of the world via countries, however the connections in question are going to US-based VPN sites. The US is not blocked at all.

Thanks in advance for any insight, it is much appreciated. I am new to Sophos UTM (home edition) but I am eager to learn.



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
  • I want to apologize for potentially wasting anyone's time- 

    The entire issue (and all my other issues) have been solved by correctly configuring Masquerading. While this may be obvious to some, I think it should have a little more emphasis in the Rulz page.

    Specifically, #3.1 - 

    • When adding an interface, don't forget the Masquerading rule for the new network behind the UTM.

    I glossed over this (sorry!) and I suspect many others do as well. Can anyone tell me why this is not set up by default? Is it a security issue or a "we don't want to assume anything about your setup" issue?

    On that note however, can someone explain to me why lack of masquerading causes strange/intermittent connection issues? Web traffic was fine, outlook 365 email was fine, but for example gmail imap was not. Nor was VPN traffic. Masquerading fixed these, but I want to know *why* it fixed them.

  • Hi, Brendan, and welcome to the UTM Community!

    Thanks for the tip about Rulz.  Would you have hit on Masquerading if the parenthetical remark had been there when first you considered #3.1?

    Some proxies do their own masquerading, including Web Filtering.

    Cheers - Bob

     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
  • To me, the impact is so major that I feel that it would warrant it's own # but that's just me. It could be #0 as far as I'm concerned.

    Good to know about web filtering. On that note, the streaming services bypass still does not work for netflix.

Share Feedback
×

Submitted a Tech Support Case lately from the Support Portal?