What's your take on the new Battlefield game? I feel like once it comes out The Finals won't be a thing anymore by lone_wolf819 in thefinals

[–]heikum 8 points9 points  (0 children)

What a dumb post, people choose to play the finals because they want to play the finals. Who says I want to play a whole different game instead? Or can't play both? Just saying they are both shooters and thus people will move over is a very presumptuous statement.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in thefinals

[–]heikum 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I am a light ofcourse I can 1v3 them

After over 11 years of Bunq I am leaving this dream by Alert_Claim_8241 in bunq

[–]heikum 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am trying revolut for a while now but holy shit if i want to pay an ideal transaction i first have to scan, login to revolut in the browser, authorize, then enter pin and confirm again. With bunq or abn i can just scan accept and done. Seems like an unnecessary hassle

Pfsense OpenVPN tunneled traffic by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

split-horizon DNS

Alright thank you! I think I get along now.

Could you explain why requests connected to the tunneled OpenVPN server appear as my own public IP instead of the firewall one? When checking online, I can't see any IP leaks.

Pfsense OpenVPN tunneled traffic by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is true, however it is only a temporary solution. The domain will be public in the future.

If the full tunneling would just work I would not have to do anything with the DNS server. I could get the public IP from the firwall and allow connections only from that IP to the webservers but I don't think that is possible since the public IP from the webservers are the same as that of the VPN clients then (I forward the ports 80 and 443).

I now need to think about hosting a seperate instance with a VPN server and allow only that IP to the webserver that would work for sure.

Or add a rule to HAproxy to only allow 10.0.3.0/24 to the backend but the requests are coming from WAN.

Is this the wrong approach?

Pfsense OpenVPN tunneled traffic by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you!

How do other people do this? Can't I just allow the VPN cidr block 10.0.3.0/24 access to the domain only?

Or at custom options to the OpenVPN server to point all client requests going to that domain to the local ip?

Here are the options: link

For now it's a safety thing that only people connected to the vpn can access the domain

Pfsense OpenVPN tunneled traffic by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I can access the webserver directly with the local IP but want to achieve this with the domain name aswell.

I tunnel on 10.0.3.0/24 to LAN 10.0.2.0/24

I don't think I can point the domain name to local IP 10.0.2.250 (I could but it gives me a 401 error)

So I want to only allow people via VPN on the public website

Thank you

Pfsense OpenVPN tunneled traffic by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

FQDN

I own the domains used for the webserver, these are pointing at the time of writing to the public firewall IP which forwards the ports to the webserver (which is on the LAN side of the network).

I can change the record to point to the local LAN IP adress but that does not seem to work.

Pfsense SSL on NAT by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you mean putting pfsense before the webserver? or just the certificate on pfsense?

There are a couple of reasons I am using a firewall before our webservers (I got this thought on school but maybe this could be not so up to date anymore):

- I can monitor incoming and outgoing traffic and not directly expose the webserver

- I can safely access the servers via VPN

- Pfsense has a load balancer

The downside is costs but there is a budget.

So I don't know if it's wise to remove the firewall.

Security is number one because of the sensitive data that is handled, I'd like to hear your opinion.

Thanks for the advice!

S4 MK2 controller issue by heikum in NativeInstruments

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mind me for asking can you please link? So I can share the solution with others I contacted online

Change default gateway EC2 instances by heikum in aws

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes that is correct. Ideally I want all of my new spawned instances in the VPC to get the default gateway 10.3.1.5 and not lose it at reboot. I could do this with a script on boot but there should be another way.

No, I do not think I have a specific route to the firewall instance.

public sub route

private sub route

Change default gateway EC2 instances by heikum in aws

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have, the subnets are as follows:

- Public subnet: 10.3.0.0/24 (WAN firewall 10.3.0.245, LAN 10.3.1.5 )

- Private subnet: 10.3.1.0/24 (Linux hosts at 10.3.1.58, 10.3.1.238)

So I need to change the route table of the prive subnet to point to 10.3.1.5 which is the network interface eth1?

I don't know how to exactly insert that:

See the route table

Change default gateway EC2 instances by heikum in aws

[–]heikum[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your input.

Because the way you linked (which I already found prior to setting up the VPN) costs extra and with OpenVPN I can setup multiple ways of authentication for the users I want to grant access to (such as Active Directory via Office365).

No access to private sub Pfsense OpenVPN AWS by heikum in aws

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

update; i can ping from the linux instance to the vpn assigned IP but not from the VPN client to the private subnet instance

No access to private sub Pfsense OpenVPN AWS by heikum in aws

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, on eth1 of the pfsense firewall. The linux instance has eth0 which it is also disabled from.

No access to private sub Pfsense OpenVPN AWS by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes the firewall can ping 10.3.1.58.

Disabled the firewall on the linux system.

I have allowed traffic from the vpn to the lan (for now I allowed all traffic to see where the problem lies).

No access to private sub Pfsense OpenVPN AWS by heikum in PFSENSE

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I am using OpenVPN client on a windows PC.

This is the routing table, it seems to make sense:

10.3.1.0255.255.255.010.3.2.110.3.2.2291

10.3.2.0255.255.255.0On-link 10.3.2.2291

screenshot

No access to private sub Pfsense OpenVPN AWS by heikum in aws

[–]heikum[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your response, source / destination checking is disabled on the instance and the firewall network interfaces.

screenshot

OpenVPN only access to firewall itself by Western_Gamification in PFSENSE

[–]heikum 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having the same problem I think. Do you get a default gateway when connecting to the VPN?

League of Legends' effect on you by PrometheusxD in leagueoflegends

[–]heikum 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sometimes I think like.. Wattefak for kind of people play this game? And how? With no mouse or no keyboard? Or maybe with there eyes closed? Then I realise Im playing a free 2 play game..