Oskar Andreasson - Iptables Tutorial 1.2.2

A good example of this is certain broadband services that have popped up in Sweden who base lots of security on Microsoft network logon. This may sound like a great idea to begin with, but once we start considering other operating systems and so on, this is no longer such a good idea. How will someone running Linux get online? Or VAX/VMS? Or HP/UX? With Linux it can be done of course, if it wasn't for the fact that the network administrator refuses anyone to use the broadband service if they are running linux by simply blocking them in such case. However, this book is not a theological discussion of what is best, so let's leave it as an example of why it is a bad idea to use non-standards.

This chapter has gone through several of the basic IP filtering and security measures that you can take to secure your networks, workstations and servers. The following subjects have been brought up:

• IP filtering usage

• IP filtering policies

• Network planning

• Firewall planning

• Layered security techniques

• Network segmentation

In the next chapter we will take a quick look at what Network Address Translation (NAT) is, and after that we will start looking closer at Iptables and it's functionality and actually start getting hands on with the beast.

NAT is one of the biggestattractions of Linux and Iptables to this day it seems. Instead of using fairly expensive third party solutions such as Cisco PIX etc, a lot of smaller companies and personal users have chosen to go with these solutions instead. One of the main reasons is that it is cheap, and secure. It requires an old computer, a fairly new Linux distribution which you can download for free from the Internet, a spare network card or two and cabling.

This chapter will describe a little bit of the basic theory about NAT, what it can be used for, how it works and what you should think about before starting to work on these subjects.

Basically, NAT allows a host or several hosts to share the same IP address in a way. For example, let's say we have a local network consisting of 5-10 clients. We set their default gateways to point through the NAT server. Normally the packet would simply be forwarded by the gateway machine, but in the case of an NAT server it is a little bit different.

NAT servers translates the source and destination addresses of packets as we already said to different addresses. The NAT server receives the packet, rewrites the source and/or destination address and then recalculates the checksum of the packet. One of the most common usages of NAT is the SNAT (Source Network Address Translation) function. Basically, this is used in the above example if we can't afford or see any real idea in having a real public IP for each and every one of the clients. In that case, we use one of the private IP ranges for our local network (for example, 192.168.1.0/24), and then we turn on SNAT for our local network. SNAT will then turn all 192.168.1.0 addresses into it's own public IP (for example, 217.115.95.34). This way, there will be 5-10 clients or many many more using the same shared IP address.

There is also something called DNAT, which can be extremely helpful when it comes to setting up servers etc. First of all, you can help the greater good when it comes to saving IP space, second, you can get an more or less totally impenetrable firewall in between your server and the real server in an easy fashion, or simply share an IP for several servers that are separated into several physically different servers. For example, we may run a small company server farm containing a webserver and ftp server on the same machine, while there is a physically separated machine containing a couple of different chat services that the employees working from home or on the road can use to keep in touch with the employees that are on-site. We may then run all of these services on the same IP from the outside via DNAT.

The above example is also based on separate port NAT'ing, or often called PNAT. We don't refer to this very often throughout this book, since it is covered by the DNAT and SNAT functionality in netfilter.

In Linux, there are actually two separate types of NAT that can be used, either Fast-NAT or Netfilter-NAT. Fast-NAT is implemented inside the IP routing code of the Linux kernel, while Netfilter-NAT is also implemented in the Linux kernel, but inside the netfilter code. Since this book won't touch the IP routing code too closely, we will pretty much leave it here, except for a few notes. Fast-NAT is generally called by this name since it is much faster than the netfilter NAT code. It doesn't keep track of connections, and this is both its main pro and con. Connection tracking takes a lot of processor power, and hence it is slower, which is one of the main reasons that the Fast-NAT is faster than Netfilter-NAT. As we also said, the bad thing about Fast-NAT doesn't track connections, which means it will not be able to do SNAT very well for whole networks, neither will it be able to NAT complex protocols such as FTP, IRC and other protocols that Netfilter-NAT is able to handle very well. It is possible, but it will take much, much more work than would be expected from the Netfilter implementation.

There is also a final word that is basically a synonym to SNAT, which is the Masquerade word. In Netfilter, masquerade is pretty much the same as SNAT with the exception that masquerading will automatically set the new source IP to the default IP address of the outgoing network interface.

As we have already explained to some extent, there are quite a lot of minor caveats with using NAT. The main problem is certain protocols and applications which may not work at all. Hopefully, these applications are not too common in the networks that you administer, and in such case, it should cause no huge problems.

The second and smaller problem is applications and protocols which will only work partially. These protocols are more common than the ones that will not work at all, which is quite unfortunate, but there isn't very much we can do about it as it seems. If complex protocols continue to be built, this is a problem we will have to continue living with. Especially if the protocols aren't standardized.

The third, and largest problem, in my point of view, is the fact that the user who sits behind a NAT server to get out on the internet will not be able to run his own server. It could be done, of course, but it takes a lot more time and work to set this up. In companies, this is probably preferred over having tons of servers run by different employees that are reachable from the Internet, without any supervision. However, when it comes to home users, this should be avoided to the very last. You should never as an Internet service provider NAT your customers from a private IP range to a public IP. It will cause you more trouble than it is worth having to deal with, and there will always be one or another client which will want this or that protocol to work flawlessly. When it doesn't, you will be called down upon.

As one last note on the caveats of NAT, it should be mentioned that NAT is actually just a hack more or less. NAT was a solution that was worked out while the IANA and other organisations noted that the Internet grew exponentially, and that the IP addresses would soon be in shortage. NAT was and is a short term solution to the problem of the IPv4 (Yes, IP which we have talked about before is a short version of IPv4 which stands for Internet Protocol version 4). The long term solution to the IPv4 address shortage is the IPv6 protocol, which also solves a ton of other problems. IPv6 has 128 bits assigned to their addresses, while IPv4 only have 32 bits used for IP addresses. This is an incredible increase in address space. It may seem like ridiculous to have enough IP addresses to set one IP address for every atom in our planet, but on the other hand, noone expected the IPv4 address range to be too small either.

This is a small theoretical scenario where we want a NAT server between 2 different networks and an Internet connection. What we want to do is to connect 2 networks to each other, and both networks should have access to each other and the Internet. We will discuss the hardware questions you should take into consideration, as well as other theory you should think about before actually starting to implement the NAT machine.

Before we discuss anything further, we should start by looking at what kind of hardware is needed to build a Linux machine doing NAT. For most smaller networks, this should be no problem, but if you are starting to look at larger networks, it can actually become one. The biggest problem with NAT is that it eats resources quite fast. For a small private network with possibly 1-10 users, a 486 with 32 MB of ram will do more than enough. However, if you are starting to get up around 100 or more users, you should start considering what kind of hardware you should look at. Of course, it is also a good idea to consider bandwidth usage, and how many connections will be open at the same time. Generally, spare computers will do very well however, and this is one of the big pros of using a Linux based firewall. You can use old scrap hardware that you have left over, and hence the firewall will be very cheap in comparison to other firewalls.

You will also need to consider network cards. How many separate networks will connect to your NAT/filter machine? Most of the time it is simply enough to connect one network to an Internet connection. If you connect to the Internet via ethernet, you should generally have 2 ethernet cards, etcetera. It can be a good idea to choose 10/100 mbit/s network cards of relatively good brands for this for scalability, but most any kinds of cards will do as long as they have drivers in the Linux kernel. A note on this matter: avoid using or getting network cards that don't have drivers actually in the Linux kernel distribution. I have on several occasions found network cards/brands that have separately distributed drivers on discs that work dismally. They are generally not very well maintained, and if you get them to work on your kernel of choice to begin with, the chance that they will actually work on the next major Linux kernel upgrade is very small. This will most of the time mean that you may have to get a little bit more costly network cards, but in the end it is worth it.

As a note, if you are going to build your firewall on really old hardware, it is suggested that you at least try to use PCI buses or better as far as possible. First of all, the network cards will hopefully be possible to use in the future when you upgrade. Also, ISA buses are extremely slow and heavy on the CPU usage. This means that putting a lot of load onto ISA network cards can next to kill your machine.

Finally, one thing more to consider is how much memory you put into the NAT/firewall machine. It is a good idea to put in at least more than 64 MB of memory if possible, even if it is possible run it on 32MB of memory. NAT isn't extremely huge on memory consumption, but it may be wise to add as much as possible just in case you will get more traffic than expected.

As you can see, there is quite a lot to think about when it comes to hardware. But, to be completely honest, in most cases you don't need to think about these points at all, unless you are building a NAT machine for a large network or company. Most home users need not think about this, but may more or less use whatever hardware they have handy. There are no complete comparisons and tests on this topic, but you should fare rather well with just a little bit of common sense.