this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

32373 readers
560 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] churisotophu@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago

This literally happened to me yesterday. Fortunately ufw enable did not configure it as persistent across reboots ๐Ÿค 

[โ€“] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago (4 children)

What is a good firewall that can also block ports published with docker? I'd need it to run on the same host.

[โ€“] iiGxC@slrpnk.net 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Ufw should work, jus ufw block/limit/allow port number

[โ€“] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I remember trying with ufw and the docker ports were still open. Iirc I've read somewhere that docker and ufw both use the same underlying software, so ufw cannot block docker (IP tables?)

[โ€“] iiGxC@slrpnk.net 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Hmm, not sure. I know with docker you can "mock" ports for the container, where the port the container sees is different than the port on the system. Maybe you can do something with that?

[โ€“] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago

I can configure the containers in ways that don't require ports to be published for the real network, but that's always possible. It would still be nice to have a firewall that can block even those containers that try to publish their ports to the whole (real) network.

[โ€“] dan@upvote.au 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Are your Docker containers connecting to the network (eg using ipvlan or macvlan)? The default bridge network driver doesn't expose the container publicly unless you explicitly expose a port. If you don't expose a port, the Docker container is only accessible from the host, not from any other system on the network.

[โ€“] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They are Only in my docker bridge networks and have a few published ports

[โ€“] dan@upvote.au 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you don't want the Docker container to be accessible from other systems then just don't publish the port.

[โ€“] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago

Yeah of course, that's what I'm doing anyways, but the purpose of a firewall would be defense in depth, even is something were to be published, the firewall got it.

[โ€“] Crack0n7uesday@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

You want a virtual firewall. Is this for profit or just your science project because that's going to change the answer. You might hate me, but I'm still gonna say it, Cisco....

[โ€“] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago

For my homelab, and I'll only host OSS

[โ€“] derpgon@programming.dev 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

UFW does work with Docker, but requires some tweaking. IIRC you have to disallow Docker to modify IPTables and then add a rule to forward all traffic to the Docker network of your choice. It's a little finicky but works.

[โ€“] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago

Interesting, I might have to read up on that next time. Thanks