IPTables redirect all UDP packets including ESTABLISHED
We currently have some rules setup in IPtables that look like the below:
-A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
This redirects packets containing that payload to our caching programs, this works great. However, only "new" packets are hitting this NAT rule. After some looking around, I managed to solve this issue by setting the following:
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout=0
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream=0
This introduced another problem where ALL UDP packets were being set to this. During a small UDP flood, this would cause all udp traffic on the server to halt.
I'm needing to redirect ALL UDP packets containing a certain payload to another port on the same machine. We have another program listening on this port that replies to this payload. This is due to a query flood that usually freezes up one of our applications, so we offload this query to another program.
Any solutions to this? Been looking around for months without any sort of answer.
iptables nat netfilter iptables-redirect
|
show 7 more comments
We currently have some rules setup in IPtables that look like the below:
-A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
This redirects packets containing that payload to our caching programs, this works great. However, only "new" packets are hitting this NAT rule. After some looking around, I managed to solve this issue by setting the following:
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout=0
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream=0
This introduced another problem where ALL UDP packets were being set to this. During a small UDP flood, this would cause all udp traffic on the server to halt.
I'm needing to redirect ALL UDP packets containing a certain payload to another port on the same machine. We have another program listening on this port that replies to this payload. This is due to a query flood that usually freezes up one of our applications, so we offload this query to another program.
Any solutions to this? Been looking around for months without any sort of answer.
iptables nat netfilter iptables-redirect
I don't see how you can translate a network address without using NAT. What are your objections to using network address translation in some form?
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 18:18
NAT is fine, except it needs to redirect all matching packets and not just NEW ones. Established connections etc do not go through NAT
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:32
I basically just need a way to redirect UDP packets containing x payload to another port
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:36
I would suggest then that you edit your question to remove the "without NAT" stipulation.
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 22:49
1
Can you edit the question and add you all rules in the NAT table ?
– Wissam Roujoulah
Nov 19 '16 at 4:58
|
show 7 more comments
We currently have some rules setup in IPtables that look like the below:
-A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
This redirects packets containing that payload to our caching programs, this works great. However, only "new" packets are hitting this NAT rule. After some looking around, I managed to solve this issue by setting the following:
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout=0
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream=0
This introduced another problem where ALL UDP packets were being set to this. During a small UDP flood, this would cause all udp traffic on the server to halt.
I'm needing to redirect ALL UDP packets containing a certain payload to another port on the same machine. We have another program listening on this port that replies to this payload. This is due to a query flood that usually freezes up one of our applications, so we offload this query to another program.
Any solutions to this? Been looking around for months without any sort of answer.
iptables nat netfilter iptables-redirect
We currently have some rules setup in IPtables that look like the below:
-A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
This redirects packets containing that payload to our caching programs, this works great. However, only "new" packets are hitting this NAT rule. After some looking around, I managed to solve this issue by setting the following:
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout=0
sudo sysctl -w net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream=0
This introduced another problem where ALL UDP packets were being set to this. During a small UDP flood, this would cause all udp traffic on the server to halt.
I'm needing to redirect ALL UDP packets containing a certain payload to another port on the same machine. We have another program listening on this port that replies to this payload. This is due to a query flood that usually freezes up one of our applications, so we offload this query to another program.
Any solutions to this? Been looking around for months without any sort of answer.
iptables nat netfilter iptables-redirect
iptables nat netfilter iptables-redirect
edited Nov 19 '16 at 1:32
user1372896
asked Nov 16 '16 at 17:18
user1372896user1372896
164
164
I don't see how you can translate a network address without using NAT. What are your objections to using network address translation in some form?
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 18:18
NAT is fine, except it needs to redirect all matching packets and not just NEW ones. Established connections etc do not go through NAT
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:32
I basically just need a way to redirect UDP packets containing x payload to another port
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:36
I would suggest then that you edit your question to remove the "without NAT" stipulation.
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 22:49
1
Can you edit the question and add you all rules in the NAT table ?
– Wissam Roujoulah
Nov 19 '16 at 4:58
|
show 7 more comments
I don't see how you can translate a network address without using NAT. What are your objections to using network address translation in some form?
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 18:18
NAT is fine, except it needs to redirect all matching packets and not just NEW ones. Established connections etc do not go through NAT
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:32
I basically just need a way to redirect UDP packets containing x payload to another port
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:36
I would suggest then that you edit your question to remove the "without NAT" stipulation.
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 22:49
1
Can you edit the question and add you all rules in the NAT table ?
– Wissam Roujoulah
Nov 19 '16 at 4:58
I don't see how you can translate a network address without using NAT. What are your objections to using network address translation in some form?
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 18:18
I don't see how you can translate a network address without using NAT. What are your objections to using network address translation in some form?
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 18:18
NAT is fine, except it needs to redirect all matching packets and not just NEW ones. Established connections etc do not go through NAT
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:32
NAT is fine, except it needs to redirect all matching packets and not just NEW ones. Established connections etc do not go through NAT
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:32
I basically just need a way to redirect UDP packets containing x payload to another port
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:36
I basically just need a way to redirect UDP packets containing x payload to another port
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:36
I would suggest then that you edit your question to remove the "without NAT" stipulation.
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 22:49
I would suggest then that you edit your question to remove the "without NAT" stipulation.
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 22:49
1
1
Can you edit the question and add you all rules in the NAT table ?
– Wissam Roujoulah
Nov 19 '16 at 4:58
Can you edit the question and add you all rules in the NAT table ?
– Wissam Roujoulah
Nov 19 '16 at 4:58
|
show 7 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
I have two completely different methods to solve this problem:
iptables with conntrack zones
Contrack zones allow multiple conntrack instances (per network namespace).
By adding an orig-zone tag to the packet and thus flow, it's possible to have two conntrack instances splitting the (half created) flow in two parts: the normal packets and the matching packets, each in its own flow. Thus usual NAT rules will continue to work and can happen twice instead of once: once for the normal packets and once for the matching packets.
Instead of duplicating the test, a mark will be put in place after the one test done on the packet.
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j MARK --set-mark 1
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -m mark --mark 1 -j CT --zone-orig 1
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp -m mark --mark 1 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
Example of conntrack results:
# conntrack -E -p udp --orig-port-dst 27035
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
nftables with notrack and packet header field mangling
requires kernel >= 4.10
(Of course the zones method could be implemented with nftables).
Here NAT is done statelessly, with conntrack disabled, for matching incoming packets and all outgoing reply packets from the redirected port.
nft add table ip raw
nft add chain ip raw prerouting '{type filter hook prerouting priority -300;}'
nft add chain ip raw output '{type filter hook output priority -300;}'
nft add rule ip raw prerouting ip daddr dstip/32 udp dport 27035 @th,64,32 == 0xffffffff @th,96,32 == 0x54536f75 @th,128,32 == 0x72636520 @th,160,32 == 0x456e6769 @th,192,32 == 0x6e652051 @th,224,32 == 0x75657279 notrack udp dport set 21010
nft add rule ip raw output udp sport 21010 notrack udp sport set 27035
(note that the u32
equivalent raw payload filters can be simplified and are actually simplified automatically by nftables: it appears nftables handles u128
internally as can be seen with nft --debug=netlink list ruleset -a
).
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f323758%2fiptables-redirect-all-udp-packets-including-established%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I have two completely different methods to solve this problem:
iptables with conntrack zones
Contrack zones allow multiple conntrack instances (per network namespace).
By adding an orig-zone tag to the packet and thus flow, it's possible to have two conntrack instances splitting the (half created) flow in two parts: the normal packets and the matching packets, each in its own flow. Thus usual NAT rules will continue to work and can happen twice instead of once: once for the normal packets and once for the matching packets.
Instead of duplicating the test, a mark will be put in place after the one test done on the packet.
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j MARK --set-mark 1
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -m mark --mark 1 -j CT --zone-orig 1
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp -m mark --mark 1 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
Example of conntrack results:
# conntrack -E -p udp --orig-port-dst 27035
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
nftables with notrack and packet header field mangling
requires kernel >= 4.10
(Of course the zones method could be implemented with nftables).
Here NAT is done statelessly, with conntrack disabled, for matching incoming packets and all outgoing reply packets from the redirected port.
nft add table ip raw
nft add chain ip raw prerouting '{type filter hook prerouting priority -300;}'
nft add chain ip raw output '{type filter hook output priority -300;}'
nft add rule ip raw prerouting ip daddr dstip/32 udp dport 27035 @th,64,32 == 0xffffffff @th,96,32 == 0x54536f75 @th,128,32 == 0x72636520 @th,160,32 == 0x456e6769 @th,192,32 == 0x6e652051 @th,224,32 == 0x75657279 notrack udp dport set 21010
nft add rule ip raw output udp sport 21010 notrack udp sport set 27035
(note that the u32
equivalent raw payload filters can be simplified and are actually simplified automatically by nftables: it appears nftables handles u128
internally as can be seen with nft --debug=netlink list ruleset -a
).
add a comment |
I have two completely different methods to solve this problem:
iptables with conntrack zones
Contrack zones allow multiple conntrack instances (per network namespace).
By adding an orig-zone tag to the packet and thus flow, it's possible to have two conntrack instances splitting the (half created) flow in two parts: the normal packets and the matching packets, each in its own flow. Thus usual NAT rules will continue to work and can happen twice instead of once: once for the normal packets and once for the matching packets.
Instead of duplicating the test, a mark will be put in place after the one test done on the packet.
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j MARK --set-mark 1
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -m mark --mark 1 -j CT --zone-orig 1
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp -m mark --mark 1 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
Example of conntrack results:
# conntrack -E -p udp --orig-port-dst 27035
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
nftables with notrack and packet header field mangling
requires kernel >= 4.10
(Of course the zones method could be implemented with nftables).
Here NAT is done statelessly, with conntrack disabled, for matching incoming packets and all outgoing reply packets from the redirected port.
nft add table ip raw
nft add chain ip raw prerouting '{type filter hook prerouting priority -300;}'
nft add chain ip raw output '{type filter hook output priority -300;}'
nft add rule ip raw prerouting ip daddr dstip/32 udp dport 27035 @th,64,32 == 0xffffffff @th,96,32 == 0x54536f75 @th,128,32 == 0x72636520 @th,160,32 == 0x456e6769 @th,192,32 == 0x6e652051 @th,224,32 == 0x75657279 notrack udp dport set 21010
nft add rule ip raw output udp sport 21010 notrack udp sport set 27035
(note that the u32
equivalent raw payload filters can be simplified and are actually simplified automatically by nftables: it appears nftables handles u128
internally as can be seen with nft --debug=netlink list ruleset -a
).
add a comment |
I have two completely different methods to solve this problem:
iptables with conntrack zones
Contrack zones allow multiple conntrack instances (per network namespace).
By adding an orig-zone tag to the packet and thus flow, it's possible to have two conntrack instances splitting the (half created) flow in two parts: the normal packets and the matching packets, each in its own flow. Thus usual NAT rules will continue to work and can happen twice instead of once: once for the normal packets and once for the matching packets.
Instead of duplicating the test, a mark will be put in place after the one test done on the packet.
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j MARK --set-mark 1
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -m mark --mark 1 -j CT --zone-orig 1
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp -m mark --mark 1 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
Example of conntrack results:
# conntrack -E -p udp --orig-port-dst 27035
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
nftables with notrack and packet header field mangling
requires kernel >= 4.10
(Of course the zones method could be implemented with nftables).
Here NAT is done statelessly, with conntrack disabled, for matching incoming packets and all outgoing reply packets from the redirected port.
nft add table ip raw
nft add chain ip raw prerouting '{type filter hook prerouting priority -300;}'
nft add chain ip raw output '{type filter hook output priority -300;}'
nft add rule ip raw prerouting ip daddr dstip/32 udp dport 27035 @th,64,32 == 0xffffffff @th,96,32 == 0x54536f75 @th,128,32 == 0x72636520 @th,160,32 == 0x456e6769 @th,192,32 == 0x6e652051 @th,224,32 == 0x75657279 notrack udp dport set 21010
nft add rule ip raw output udp sport 21010 notrack udp sport set 27035
(note that the u32
equivalent raw payload filters can be simplified and are actually simplified automatically by nftables: it appears nftables handles u128
internally as can be seen with nft --debug=netlink list ruleset -a
).
I have two completely different methods to solve this problem:
iptables with conntrack zones
Contrack zones allow multiple conntrack instances (per network namespace).
By adding an orig-zone tag to the packet and thus flow, it's possible to have two conntrack instances splitting the (half created) flow in two parts: the normal packets and the matching packets, each in its own flow. Thus usual NAT rules will continue to work and can happen twice instead of once: once for the normal packets and once for the matching packets.
Instead of duplicating the test, a mark will be put in place after the one test done on the packet.
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -d dstip/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 27035 -m u32 --u32 "0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x8=0xffffffff&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0xc=0x54536f75&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x10=0x72636520&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x14=0x456e6769&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x18=0x6e652051&&0x0>>0x16&0x3c@0x1c=0x75657279" -j MARK --set-mark 1
iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -m mark --mark 1 -j CT --zone-orig 1
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp -m mark --mark 1 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 21010
Example of conntrack results:
# conntrack -E -p udp --orig-port-dst 27035
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 [UNREPLIED] src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=27035 dport=52670
[UPDATE] udp 17 30 src=10.0.3.1 dst=10.0.3.66 sport=52670 dport=27035 zone-orig=1 src=10.0.3.66 dst=10.0.3.1 sport=21010 dport=52670
nftables with notrack and packet header field mangling
requires kernel >= 4.10
(Of course the zones method could be implemented with nftables).
Here NAT is done statelessly, with conntrack disabled, for matching incoming packets and all outgoing reply packets from the redirected port.
nft add table ip raw
nft add chain ip raw prerouting '{type filter hook prerouting priority -300;}'
nft add chain ip raw output '{type filter hook output priority -300;}'
nft add rule ip raw prerouting ip daddr dstip/32 udp dport 27035 @th,64,32 == 0xffffffff @th,96,32 == 0x54536f75 @th,128,32 == 0x72636520 @th,160,32 == 0x456e6769 @th,192,32 == 0x6e652051 @th,224,32 == 0x75657279 notrack udp dport set 21010
nft add rule ip raw output udp sport 21010 notrack udp sport set 27035
(note that the u32
equivalent raw payload filters can be simplified and are actually simplified automatically by nftables: it appears nftables handles u128
internally as can be seen with nft --debug=netlink list ruleset -a
).
edited 22 mins ago
answered 28 mins ago
A.BA.B
4,2721724
4,2721724
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f323758%2fiptables-redirect-all-udp-packets-including-established%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
I don't see how you can translate a network address without using NAT. What are your objections to using network address translation in some form?
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 18:18
NAT is fine, except it needs to redirect all matching packets and not just NEW ones. Established connections etc do not go through NAT
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:32
I basically just need a way to redirect UDP packets containing x payload to another port
– user1372896
Nov 18 '16 at 18:36
I would suggest then that you edit your question to remove the "without NAT" stipulation.
– roaima
Nov 18 '16 at 22:49
1
Can you edit the question and add you all rules in the NAT table ?
– Wissam Roujoulah
Nov 19 '16 at 4:58