FTP with Tcpcrypt vs. NAT
FTP with Tcpcrypt vs. NAT
Posted Aug 26, 2010 15:50 UTC (Thu) by imitev (guest, #60045)In reply to: FTP with Tcpcrypt vs. NAT by djao
Parent article: Transport-level encryption with Tcpcrypt
In the case of FTP passive, you usually connect to port 21 (control channel), and if you up/down something (or even ls ?) the server replies (in the payload) with "ok, connect to port 12345" ; port 12345 is random and is for the data channel.
Now in the case of NAT, if you want - say - to match RELATED packets with iptables, you need the ftp conntrack helper which will *read* the payload/data for ftp connections (control channel) so that what would be a NEW connection to the data channel on the random port supplied by the ftp server is actually matched by the connection tracking logic, and labelled as RELATED.
Having the headers clear text doesn't help here, you really need to be able to read what's in the payload.
I may be wrong though, it's been a long time I dealt with that stuff.
Posted Aug 26, 2010 16:02 UTC (Thu)
by djao (guest, #4263)
[Link]
Posted Aug 26, 2010 17:05 UTC (Thu)
by imitev (guest, #60045)
[Link]
Right, I didn't think about that. Thanks for the explanation.
FTP with Tcpcrypt vs. NAT
FTP with Tcpcrypt vs. NAT
Anyway, in both case you still need to read what's in the payload.