I want to set up ufw on my server, but something wrong here. Even when I trying to block 22 port ssh still working and nothing changing. I have ufw enabled, but nothing works.

Pretty much nobody can help you with the information you provided there.

Minimum required is going to be a ‘ufw status’ output. The whole output, not an edited partial output.

@someoneFromInternet@lemmy.ml
creator
link
fedilink
English
11M

So you want to block port 22? Yet the rule you added allows access, or am I misunderstanding?

You probably need to be DENY instead of ALLOW if that’s what you’re wanting to accomplish.

@bmcgonag@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
41M

This! You have it set to “Allow”, so it’s allowing it. You need to set it to Deny.

@someoneFromInternet@lemmy.ml
creator
link
fedilink
English
-21M

I understand it

Possibly linux
link
fedilink
English
51M

Is this a troll post or are you really struggling?

@someoneFromInternet@lemmy.ml
creator
link
fedilink
English
11M

really struggling

Possibly linux
link
fedilink
English
31M
sudo ufw delete allow 22

Is this a public facing server? If it isn’t the online port port scanners will not work as they are scanning your public IP. Also they are unreliable in general. Best tool for the job is nmap. It has a ton of config options so you will need to do some reading. (Definitely worth the learn)

@someoneFromInternet@lemmy.ml
creator
link
fedilink
English
-11M

, no, I want to open, for example this port, but:

That’s a website tool checking? It’s almost certainly only going to check TCP, since most of them don’t do anything with UDP because it’s… more complicated.

You may need to find an alternate way to do that, something like iperf or netcat (nc -u ip port)

Ace! _SL/S
link
fedilink
English
2
edit-2
1M

nmap works great for this

traceroute might also be usable vith the -p switch I guess?

Do you have something listening on port 52038 that will respond to a port scan? If not it will report as closed.

@someoneFromInternet@lemmy.ml
creator
link
fedilink
English
1
edit-2
1M

It’s my port for wireguard and here what I can’t understand: when I blocking port for this wireguard service I still can use wireguard even if ufw deny it.

Is wireguard incoming or outgoing from the machine you’re trying to block it on?

@someoneFromInternet@lemmy.ml
creator
link
fedilink
English
11M

outgoing, I guess. I mean, it’s on my vps which I want to use for vpn

Make sure you’re creating a block rule specifically on outgoing in that case.

Wireguard appears as closed unless it receives the proper packet.

@someoneFromInternet@lemmy.ml
creator
link
fedilink
English
11M

that’s what I looked for

Create a post

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it’s not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don’t duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

  • 1 user online
  • 252 users / day
  • 647 users / week
  • 1.41K users / month
  • 3.93K users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 3.78K Posts
  • 76.7K Comments
  • Modlog