Disable 'block all other UDP packets'

Is it correct?

 

Its correct, hence why I said ‘One down...’


Now before I make the last part easy for yea, tell me if the rule we have so far is an server or client rule, and where must we have this rule located in the ruleset .... like before rule '?' or after rule '?'.

 

My PC is a server, WWW is a client.
Before rule?

 

heh! Are you hosting www-http server on your PC? and is this what this rule allows, access to your hosted www-http server?

 

Ok my bad I didn't think
This rule allows to send request on 80 port from my PC to remote adress and receive packets from port 80 remote adress on my PC range ports.

 

“send request on 80“ source or destination port? And you said “receive packets from port 80 remote address” , you talking about 80 destination?

 

“send request on 80“ source or destination port?
the 80 port (listening port) will be then destination for SYN TCP packet send from my PC (client > server)

“receive packets from port 80 remote address”
The server accepts a connection requested by the client (my PC) and returns a TCP packet with SYN-ACK flags.
In that case destination will be my PC and port range on my PC.

 

Beautiful! now where must we have this rule located in the ruleset .... like before rule '?' or after rule '?' ..?

 

What do you mean by '?' rule? Rule which blocks all other TCP packets?
If yes then this rule should be before rule which blocks all other TCP packets.

 

Is this a server rule or client rule we made?

 

Hi Creer,

Your Welcome,

Looking good. The only thing that jumps out at me is your post 76.



I am not sure if L`n`S allows the notation "0x" so I would not use that. I would also restrict the rule to IPV4


- Stem

 

It's client rule... goes under TCP Block incoming connections since my PC initiating the TCP connection to remote machine, right?

 

Thank you Stem, I also not sure if LnS allows that type of notation... I can replace 0x12 > 18 (decimal). And I will remember about restrict to IP in case of TCP rules.

 

Hi Creer,

You can still place hex, it is just I would put "00.12" for that entry.


- Stem

 

Indeed! Good job!

 

Thank you Stem and Phant0m for your help.
Today morning I didn't expect that I will learn so much about RAW rules in LnS in one day. Thanks to you I finally understand (maybe not fully but most of them) how all these things work.
I really appreciate your time for helping others like me here on forum. You have a big knowledge and you know how to share your knowledge with other people. It's very rare.
Thanks again for that.

 

Anytime.

 

You guys actually made my easy going thread about me not being able to play online games to a high-tech-level about packets and what not. I do not even understand half of what you mean but I got my games to work in a more insecure way. But I suppose this thread will help a lot of people getting the ultimate solution to play with LnS activated.

EDIT: Just noticed there were a few people wondering the same thing as I, except they had other purposes with it. Nevermind my rant above.

 

Yes sorry it really looks like I just hijacked your thread, so if any moderator read this and think it's offtopic please move posts from #57 to separate new thread (eg. "RAW Rule creating in LnS" or smth like this).

Thank you in advance
Creer

 

Haha. I was being happy others had the same thoughts as I had. No need to separate the thread!

 

Excellent idea Creer, and it would make it easier to find for everyones.
Thank you much to all three of you for this thread on raw rule editing. Good job, very educational. It's already archived here, because I know that I will need to read it some more times, hoping to gain of it a better grasp on this technical topic. I see now how it can be handy for refining our rules/ruleset, and it makes of tiny LnS a very unique and incredibly powerful firewall, in a class all by itself.

ps: do i smell a sticky?