One was being used for NAT and the same was using in palo alto interface as well. SYN and ACK are flags in the header of a TCP/IP packet.
In simple words there was an IP conflict in the network. I can see the syn packet being permitted, acls. If the SYN packet enters through one firewall and the SYN/ACK packet exits the network through another firewall, the SYN/ACK packet is rejected because the connection's first packet used a different firewall. Ive created a rule in the proper ACL permitting another range of their address to access the web server. This means that the connection must be initiated through the same firewall for application data to be allowed. Im experiencing some kind of weird behavior of my ASA 5520 (8.3.1) I have a customer that needs to access an inside webserver of mine. The issue got fixed by removing the pool IP from the particular rule and deleted the same, 09-23-2014 12:04 PM - edited 03-11-2019 09:49 PM. I found out the reason for the unusual TCP hand shake, the reason behind the issue is there was another policy in place which was using the same public IP ( 203.XX.205.XX) as a NAT IP ( IP pool) in Fortigate. Machines ( NATED with PA interface IP,ie 203.XX.205.XX-) ->Palo Alto->Eth0( 203.XX.205.XX-this is a public IP) ->Fortigate ( No NAT, Policy Source- 203.XX.205.XX-& Destination Any)-> Internet Router->Internet The Artemis Red Team is a subcommunity within the Synack Red Team for all women, trans and non-binary people, and others who identify as a gender minority. ie,The gateway of PALO ALTO is our Forigate firewall. We have a client who has a dedicated firewall ( Palo Alto) and is directly connected to the external firewall which is a Fortigate one. During a SYN-ACK flood attack the attacked host server is. now O should reply to an unknown SYN/ACK by RST and the attack is unsuccesful. There is a slight difference in the scenario. Syn - Syn-Ack Rst Nihas New Contributor Created on 05-11-2015 08:31 AM Syn - Syn-Ack Rst Hi I have a internal network which I have NATED with ( using a different firewall) a public IP and allowed the same in Fortigate. Operating as usual, a host server generates SYN-ACK packets in response to incoming SYN requests. Is this not correct? if so I would assume the web-server is hidden been the other firewall (FORTIGATE ) and you would have a DNAT or PORT-forwrd. Powered by the elite expertise of the Synack Red Team and an intelligent platform. Your flow captures looks like a client is in AWS and this traffic is coming inbound. Synack - Premier Security Testing Platform Solutions for the Toughest Security Challenges Penetration Testing Continuous, on-demand penetration testing that scales with you. Thanks Emnoc and Sorry for the late reply.
0 kommentar(er)
