ip based restrictions problem

Published by: jack 2010-03-20

hi folks,
situation: sshd, running on port 22, i connect to it from known ip addresses. opro 2.5 is in rules wizard mode. in application settings, on top are the rules that allow given traffic (from known ips) and below are the ones that deny it (for various ips that tried to connect to sshd). now the issue is (and prolly lies in my misunderstanding how outpost rules work):

Digital Video | Electronic Frontier Foundation::
In fact, Hollywood's pushing Congress to slap restrictions on anything with a record . will be larded with the above types of restrictions and all their attendant problems. Act on ACTA: Tell Congress to Open the Secret IP Pact
http://www.eff.org/issues/digital-videoHOME

if some1 connects to my pc to sshd port, popup appears, i create specific rule: block any traffic that comes in for sshd application/port. this rule is below the rules that allow known ips to connect. and from this moment i can't connect to sshd at all (from known remote ips of course). why is this? are rules followed from top to bottom, bottom to top, top to bottom AND if there's any rule to block traffic it takes priority? i'm lost. :confused:
what i want to achieve: allow sshd traffic from the few known ips and block all the rest.

Hypersingular integral equations and their applications - Google Books Result::
href=http://books.google.com/books?id=vEu8BmL_lWIC&pg=PA211&lpg=PA211&dq=ip+based+restrictions+problem&source=bl&ots=6EMko3qWMt&sig=ARyO71UfjFAYEz_cJt5m95kruQA&hl=en&ei=sQMDS_DELZHgswOZjay4Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=69&ved=0CN8BEOgBMEQ4Gw class=l onmousedown=return clk(this.href,,,res,96,,0CN4BEBQwRDgb)>Hypersingular integral equations and their applications - Google Books Resultby Ivan Kuzʹmich Lifanov, Lev N. Poltavskiĭ, G - 2004 - Mathematics - 396 pagesProblems of restriction to e\ or £2 are called problems of restriction to L+ or respectively; A±(ip) are Holder continuous functions, A±(<p) * 0 on L,
http://books.google.com/books?id=vEu8BmL_lWIC&pg=PA211&lpg=PA211&dq=ip+based+restrictions+problem&source=bl&ots=6EMko3qWMt&sig=ARyO71UfjFAYEz_cJt5m95kruQA&hl=en&ei=sQMDS_DELZHgswOZjay4Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=69&ved=0CN8BEOgBMEQ4GwHOME

f.e

No, it is not a known problem. I would strongly suggest you check the previous rules and ensure that the addresses and ports are correct - the most likely cause is that these are not matching your actual traffic. Bear in mind that rules for outgoing TCP traffic should only specify a remote port, rules for incoming TCP traffic should only specify a local port.

Squid access control problem::
Vulnerable Systems: Those relying on squid access restrictions to keep students, You can also replace the URL by its numerical IP address(at least this This breaks port- and IDENT-based > rules. > I suppose that in this case you
http://insecure.org/sploits/squid.access-control.htmlHOME

Rusty's Bleeding Edge Page::
I am not a lawyer; I started using the GPL based on other's explanations and the preamble. Now, I don't care how someone tries to add restrictions against my The question then becomes one of the size of the problem, and the cost of . Then back in Sydney for the Unlocking IP conference on Monday and
http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/index.cgi/IPHOME

If you still have problems, please supply full details of the rules you are using and the log entries you are seeing (you will need to right-click in the log viewer window, select Columns... and check the local address and port boxes to see these details - please do so before posting them since they are important for incoming traffic).

...are rules followed from top to bottom, bottom to top, top to bottom AND if there's any rule to block traffic it takes priority? i'm lost. :confused:
what i want to achieve: allow sshd traffic from the few known ips and block all the rest.Rules in Outpost are processed in order from top to bottom so to allow traffic from certain addresses only, create an Allow rule listing those addresses and follow this up with a Block rule listing no addresses (which will then apply to any traffic not matching the Allow rule).

thanks for the response. i got the rules processing right then :)) anyway - that's where the problem is: after i add 'block all' rule to the very bottom of the application rules, *all* traffic is stopped to this application. is this known problem?
regards,
f.e