Slashdot Mirror


Configuring IPCop Firewalls

Ravi writes "IPCop is a GPLed firewall solution targeted at Small Office/Home Office network. It is favored by many for its ease of configuration and setup and its support for a variety of features that you would expect to have in a modern firewall. IPCop is famed for letting users setup a sophisticated firewall for ones network without ever having to write an iptables rule themselves." Read the rest of Ravi's review. Configuring IPCOP Firewalls - Closing borders with Open Source author Barrie Dempster and James Eaton-Lee pages 230 publisher Packt Publishing rating 8.5 reviewer Ravi ISBN 1-904811-36-1 summary A practical book that takes a hands on approach in setting up and configuring IPCop firewall on ones network

Configuring IPCop Firewalls published by Packt Publishing is authored by two people Barrie Dempster and James Eaton-Lee and is divided into 11 chapters. The first chapter gives a brief introduction to firewalls and explains technical concepts such as OSI reference model, an introduction to TCP/IP and a brief outline of the parts that comprise a network. Even though I did not find anything new in this chapter, I realized that this is meant for people who are new to the world of computer networks and aims to bring them up to date with the various technologies associated with it. A network administrator intending to pick up skills in configuring and setting up IPCop, can circumvent this chapter and go to the second chapter which gives an introduction to IPCop and its different features. The authors have explained the concepts in an easily understood way with the aid of necessary screen-shots. One of the salient features of IPCop is its web based interface which allows one to configure all aspects of it from a remote location. In fact, IPCop is designed to be controlled from a remote location and serves all its configuration parameters via the Apache web server.

In the second chapter, one gets to know all the features of IPCOP including the different services it offer. One thing that struck me while going through this book was that the authors are fully immersed in explaining the configuration aspects of IPCop which is done entirely via the web interface. Other than the first, third, and 10th chapter, where the readers are made to digest some theory, the rest of the book is as a how-to. I found this to be ideally suited for people who are the least bothered about theory and just want to set up IPCop and get on with what they were doing.

In the third chapter, we are introduced to the unique feature used by IPCop to segregate the network depending upon its vulnerability. And in the succeeding chapter, the authors walk one through installing IPCop. Here each and every installation step is explained with the help of a screenshot which makes understanding the procedure much more intuitive.

The chapter titled "Basic IPCop Usage" gives a good introduction to the web interface provided by IPCop. Reading this chapter, I was able to get a good feel for the IPCop interface. More specifically, you learn how to configure IPCop to provide different services such as DHCP server, support for Dynamic DNS, editing the hosts file and so on. The IPCop interface is quite rich in functionality even providing options to reboot or shutdown the machine remotely. In this chapter, apart from the introduction to the web interface, the authors have also provided a few tips related to logging in to the remote machine running IPCop using SSH.

Put in simple terms, IPCop is a specialized Linux distribution which contain a collection of tools which revolve around providing robust firewall capabilities. The tools bundled with IPCop range from the ubiquitous iptables, services such as DNS, and DHCP, to tools which specialize in intrusion detection such as snort.

The sixth chapter titled "Intrusion Detection with IPCop" explains the concept of intrusion detection and how one can use snort IDS bundled with IPCop to effectively find out what is passing through our network and thus isolate any harmful packets.

The book moves on to explain how to use IPCop to set up a virtual private network (VPN). By way of an example, the authors explain how to setup a VPN between two remote networks with each end having a IPCop firewall in place. This chapter covers different VPN scenarios such as host to net, net to net connections as well as configuring IPCop to detect the Certifying Authority certificates.

The 8th chapter is a rather short one which explains how to effectively use proxying and caching solutions available in IPCop to manage the bandwidth.

One of the biggest advantages of IPCop is that it is possible to extend it to provide additional features by way of add-ons. Add-ons are generally developed by third parties and are usually developed with an aim to provide a feature that the developers of IPCop have missed. There are a whole lot of add-ons available for IPCop. The 9th chapter introduces the most popular add-ons available for IPCop such as SquidGuard — a content filtering add-on, LogSend — an add-on which send the IPCop logs to remote email accounts, AntiSpam, integrating ClamAV anti virus solution and more. The authors have also explained how to install and enable these add-ons using the IPCop web interface.

The tenth chapter titled "Testing, Auditing and Hardening IPCop" has more of a theoretical disposition where the authors list some of the common attributes towards security and patch management and also some of the security risks and a few common security and auditing tools and tests.

One thing I really like about this book is the practical approach taken by the authors in explaining how to accomplish a certain task. Each section is accompanied by the relevant screenshots of the web interface with a brief explanation of the options available. The book is well designed with a number of tips provided in each section highlighted in big square brackets which makes it quite eye catching. Even though I found the book a bit short on theory, it is an ideal resource which provides a hands on approach to people who are more interested in installing and setting up IPCop firewall solutions in ones network rather than pondering about the theoretical concepts of the same.

Ravi Kumar likes to share his thoughts on all things related to GNU/Linux, Open Source and Free Software through his blog on Linux.

You can purchase Configuring IPCOP Firewalls - Closing borders with Open Source from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

24 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Find it here by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
  2. If you read Slashdot... by b0bby · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...you probably don't need this book. IPCop is super easy to to set up & configure if you're even the slightest bit geeky. I really like it, but then I'm the slightest bit geeky.

  3. IPCop versus SmoothWall by intnsred · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does anyone knowledgeable want to contrast IPCop to SmoothWall?

    Advantages/Disadvantages? Pros/Cons?

    1. Re:IPCop versus SmoothWall by TellarHK · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I haven't followed the projects since way back, but IPCop was originally a fork of SmoothWall meant to stay completely Free after a "dickishness inclined" project founder pissed a good number of people off with particularly ugly actions and statements. Not to mention a downright hostile stance toward helping non-paid users and threatening critics with lawsuits (myself being one of the recipients of an indirect threat levelled against me through my college where I once hosted some email correspondence with some of the SmoothWall team) in order to silence people speaking up about issues with said founder being... well, a douchebag.

    2. Re:IPCop versus SmoothWall by il_diablo · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'll second that.

      I was a paying user of Smoothwall, and the founder was still a total douchebag to me. I was reselling the product to some clients, having had such a good experience with the product in house (my small company of 6 people). There was quite a bit of angst trying to get him to take care of some relatively simple things in the ordering chain...like provide an actual physical product to the client.

      Yes, I know it was downloadable. Yes, I know the point of open source/pseudo open source software. But if you're selling a *product*, at least *try* to act like you're an actual fulfillment channel.

      Nice product, utter a-hole of a founder.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    3. Re:IPCop versus SmoothWall by jazman_777 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The guy running SmoothWall, in my opinion, made Theo de Raadt (OpenBSD) look like someone with whom you'd like to have a spot of tea and a lovely afternoon chat.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    4. Re:IPCop versus SmoothWall by sparkyradar · · Score: 4, Informative
      I've used SmoothWall, and found it easy to setup, and extend. At the time (several years ago) IPCop was a pretty new fork from SmoothWall, so they were nearly the same. The GUI tools were different, and (particularly important for the forkers) the developer-attitude was supposed to be much-improved with IPCop.


      In terms of hardware, I was using a Pentium-166, which had *tons* of horsepower for this application (either IPCop or SmoothWall). The only thing was that it was older hardware, and about once a month it would sporadically die :-( Because of this, and also the 200W power-consumption, I eventually ditched it for a consumer-grade Netgear NAT/"firewall" thingy... I've never regretted this move! Be guided...


      SmoothWall was a compacted Linux distribution, which allowed for the usual Linux apps to be added. Want to your your own ntpd for your home-LAN? No problem. Perhaps some fancy dchp-configuration options - again, no problem.


      -sparkyradar

  4. Other options by Jesterboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Personally, I've always used m0n0wall since it can be run from a CD/floppy/flash drive, and the only experience I've ever had with IPCop was a bad one. I was working on a small project with a tight deadline, and it just completely failed at a crucial moment and I didn't give it a second look. Admittedly, it was configured by an idiot, so I am wondering:

    What does IPCop offer that other options (m0n0wall, Smoothwall) don't?

    What is the most barebones setup you can manage with it? By that I mean the smallest system requirements to get decent performance?

    1. Re:Other options by racermd · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've tried both m0n0wall and Smoothwall, but neither of them seemed as easy to use. IPCop is (to me) logically laid out and incredibly easy to configure with nothing more than the descriptions on each of the config pages in the GUI.

      As for hardware config, I'm running a 1GHz P3 that I swiped out of a friend's PC that he was upgrading (long ago - a socket 370). It's got 256MB of RAM, and a 4GB disk, as well. This setup is *way* more than enough to run IPCop. One of it's advantages is a small system footprint, so it can run on things like the soekris boards. The newest model - the 4801 - is a 266MHz AMD Geode CPU w/ 128MB of RAM. That system is also fairly peppy for IPCop.

      Another friend of mine is running on a P90 and 32MB of RAM. With the proxy features turned on, he'd hit the swap space pretty hard. He has since turned the proxy features off and is running a cable-modem connection into his whole house with it (about 8-10 devices).

      I'm sure Smoothwall and m0n0wall are similar in their system requirements.

      For me, IPCop is just much easier to figure out and use. I was considering getting the book, but I'm not so sure now that I've read the review. I've pretty much figured everything out.

      --
      My sources are unreliable, but their information is fascinating. -- Ashleigh Brilliant
    2. Re:Other options by Zuke8675309 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've run ipcop on an old p166 with 32mb ram and a equally tiny hard drive (don't remember how big off hand) and it worked great for a network of 50 or so computers.

      Currently I run two at our private school, one is an old ibm e-series celeron 800 and the other is a p3-450. I moved up in processor speed because the current two machines fit in my rack better. :)
      Both perform flawlessly and continuous uptime would be over a year if we didn't have a long power-outtage a couple months ago. I just checked the cpu graph on the celeron 800 machine and the highest it hit was 15% in the past 24 hours. So that tells me that I could have a slower cpu and be ok. Obviously, it all depends on how many computers you'd be putting behind the ipcop.

      I suspect that if you had a problem before with IPcop failing then it was most likely a hardware issue. A clean install is practically foolproof for anyone with even minor geek knowledge.

      IPcop also works pretty well as a vmware virtual machine. There are a couple of vm images available for it this way too.

    3. Re:Other options by Charles+Dodgeson · · Score: 2, Informative
      I can't speak to the difference between IPCop and Smoothwall, but the difference between those two and monowall is enormous. Monowall is designed to run on very small systems. I recommend it on a Soekris net4801 where monowall can fit on an 8MB Compact Flash card. If energy consumption and space are a concern for you than something like monowall is great.

      If, however, you want to do any kind of proxying (Squid for example) or run larger services off of the firewall and you have some old spare machine to use than something like IPCop maybe the right way to go.

      I like keeping a powerful and flexible firewall (monowall) as a unit by itself. If later, I want to add web proxying, I can always put that on a separate box, and simply set the firewall to only allow web requests from the proxy.

      But there are plenty of cases, where I've recommended something like Smoothwall/IPCop.

      --
      Prime numbers are exactly what Alan Greenspan says they are -S. Minsky
  5. I've deployed IPcop extensively by t0qer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Small real estate company with several sattelite offices around the bay area. Owner was cheap. Sometimes a cheap boss can force you to be creative, which can be fun.

    Most of the IPcop firewalls in the sattelite offices are running on PII or less machines, with the main office on a P4 1.4ghz. Freeswan VPN's are setup between all the office.

    Not much more to say than that. Other than a few upgrades (easily done through the web interface) my ipcop boxes have had uptimes around 2 years. Very awesome, reliable firewall.

  6. Re:Stop the Ubuntuization of Linux! by MoxFulder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why not? Using a user-friendly GUI to configure a Linux firewall is a great way to *LEARN* to use more advanced features down the road.

    I am an experienced Linux user and do pretty much everything from the command line. But I find there is a lot to like about the new GUI utilities like gnome-system-tools, especially compared to their MS Windows counterparts.

    One of the great things about most Linux GUI configuration utilities is that they use the *same* configuration files that you could edit by hand, and generally try to modify them in a human-readable way. For example, under Debian or Ubuntu, you can edit your /etc/apt/sources.list file by hand, or have Synaptic do it for you. Synaptic will correctly parse any changes that you make, and if it modifies the file, it will do so in an easy-to-read way. I recently installed Ubuntu for a friend of mine and explained to him that a good way to learn to use the command line configuration files is to play around with the GUI utilities and study the changes they make to those files.

    Contrast this with Windows where a lot of things can ONLY be configured with the GUI utilities, which often write their changes to impenetrable, undocumented binary registry keys... very hard to track down. If you try to configure things from the command line in Windows, you'll run into inconsistencies. For example, Windows XP actually has an /etc/hosts file like Linux somewhere under the \winnt\system32 directory... I made the mistake of editing it by hand, and then trying to undo the changes with the GUI. The changes made by the GUI were somehow silently ignored, which led to a mistifying series of DNS problems.

    So I see the gnome-system-tools style of GUI configuration tools to be a Very Good Thing. These utilities make configuration easier for many people, without preventing them from accessing the underlying configuration in a comprehensive manner, and without leaving the system in an inconsistent state.

  7. IPCop vs DD-WRT by bcnstony · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've used IPCop, both a couple years ago and for a while earlier this year. I was impressed by it both times, but was unhappy about the noise/heat/electricity of a box running 24/7. Granted, it had great features, but I really didn't use them, so I just replaced it with a WRT54G running DD-WRT (I stopped using sveasoft after I felt they weren't honoring the spirit, if not the letter, of GPL).

    IPCop will permenantly dominate if someone manages to port it to the WRT54G. If I could have the amazing power of IPCop in a $50 silent box, that used little electricity, then I think IPCop would be on the edge of being a killer appliance.

    (If you were hoping I was going to say one was better than the other, it's like asking which is better - a sandwich or a glass of water - it depends if you're hungry or thirsty)

  8. Re:Stop the Ubuntuization of Linux! by TrappedByMyself · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So you want Linux to only be used by "geeks" and have *less* market penetration?

    Nah, he just doesn't want his "1337ness" to go away as people realize that these things really aren't as difficult as they seem

    --

    Help me take back Slashdot. When did 'News for Nerds' become 'FUD and Conspiracy Theories for Extremist Nutjobs'?
  9. Copfilter... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2, Informative
    Copfilter is an add-on for IPCop that provides spam and virus filtering using SpamAssassin, Clam, and proxSMTP. It can also filter incoming POP3 streams and even WWW traffic (but is sloooow doing it). Not terribly configurable, but handy if you need a quick spam appliance solution that Just Works. The only thing is that is doesn't seem to play nice when IPCop is running off a flash card and RAMdisk.

    I'm using IPCop and Copfilter on a LinITX PC for a client and so far he's very happy with the results. LinITX is a mini-ITX PC slightly larger than a Linksys "blue box" router with built-in video/USB/AT (so you don't have to configure it via serial console!), three Ethernet ports, a flash disk slot, room for a 2.5" HDD internally, and 2 on-board IDE controllers - you can even temporarily hook up a generic internal CD-ROM drive for install purposes.

    -b.

  10. imho by coaxeus · · Score: 2, Informative

    I do firewall/VPN/security work for a living; I've tried/used Ipcop and nearly all of the products mentioned below and dozens more (m0n0wall, cisco PIX, cisco ASA, checkpoint, juniper, smoothwall, proxy bases firewalls, sonicwall, guarddog, watchdog, hommade linux/freebsd/openbsd/etc etc).
    I personally vastly prefer PfSense over any of them for nearly all applications. http://pfsense.com/

    --
    My name is coaxeus, and I approve this message. In fact, I think it is awesome.
  11. pfSense by korozion · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've used a lot of products like this. However I find pfSense a lot better.

    --


    Join the Linux Generation. #LinuxGeneration on EFnet Linux Counter #249871
  12. uptime by Danzigism · · Score: 2, Informative

    IPCop is a great linux-router distro for old crappy machines as well.. i have it running at home on a pentium 133 with 32 megs of ram.. its been up 96 days without any problems at all.. the BSD based firewalls are great as well, but there's really not that much of a performance difference in my opinion.. they all do the same exact thing in the long run.. i guess its just a matter of your personal preference.. but for those of you who have an old piece just sitting in your closet, it'd make a great IPCop box.. incredibly easy to setup as well..

    --
    *plays the Apogee theme song music*
  13. A "solution"? It's a distro. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think it would have been helpful to note somewhere in the review what IPCop actually is. It's a Linux firewall distribution.

    Reading the review, I thought that it was some new packet filtering system, like an actual replacement/alternative to iptables that I'd just never heard about.

    The review's introduction called it a "solution" which is a generic term for 'anything that does anything, somehow.' Not very descriptive.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  14. Re:The Truth by value_added · · Score: 2, Informative

    Personally I would prefer a PIX over a linux firewall.

    Well, if you can afford it, and don't mind learning IOS, great. Reading the replies thus far, it seems the home-user would prefer something else, although that something else seems to include everything but the kitchen sink.

    Maybe it's me, but my idea of firewall is something that I manage over a serial cable that isn't doing anything else but handling traffic, and perhaps logging to an external box. A web server, DNS, DHCP, ClamAV, SquidGuard, etc. etc. etc., might be handy, but those are standard network services and belong elsewhere.

    Seems like a good enough book, though. My vote is still with pf on a *BSD system. The pf FAQ is as well-written as any book, and the examples provided should allow even the novice user to be up and running in minutes. Pick up a Soekris box and Bob's yer uncle.

  15. Re:Stop the Ubuntuization of Linux! by Psiren · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If you can't handcode an iptables rule (including new chains) you don't deserve to have a Linux firewall, goddamn it.

    Spoken like a true computer scientist. I know, I used to be one. You see, the problem is you're spending too much time getting excited about the solution and not enough time looking at the problem.

    It certainly doesn't hurt to have an understanding of the underlying mechanics of Linux based firewalls, but it shouldn't have to be a prerequisite of solving your problem. I've been a Linux user for 10+ years and I use IPCop at home. I'm familiar enough with iptables to solve any problems I might encounter, but I'm not interested in any more than that. I actually want to use my computers as tools, rather than spending all my time figuring out how to do something which should be easy.

    Would you recommend every motorist should be able to strip their engine down and rebuild it? It just isn't feasible, or sensible.
  16. pf please by pkplex · · Score: 2, Informative

    IMO the IPCOP style firewall systems are only good for quite basic setups, mostly in the 'two nics, one external one internal' realm.

    But if your firewalls need to have multiple nic's and such, running carp and pfsync, doing all sorts of funky stuff on each, then the web based things suck. The best ive seen is pfsense, but it still suffers from the whole concept of internal/external nic's instead of just letting me sort that shit out.

    I use FreeBSD for all my firewalls now, with the exception of one pair of firewalls which I use openbsd with, only because obsd has the 'carpdev' option and FreeBSD does not, meaning I cant carp external IP addresses properly ( FreeBSD looks for the NIC with an IP on the same subnet as the desired carp IP ).

    If you are looking after a semi complex network then IMO dont use IPCOP/Pfsense style setups, as nice as they may for some things.

  17. Been using IPCop for a while... by emotal · · Score: 2, Informative

    I work for a county hospital, so we don't get much money for equipment. So, a couple of years ago, when we out-grew our old firewall, I was forced to come up with a firewall solution for little or no money. So I took a spare pc and set it up with IPCop. We still use IPCop today, except now it is on a P4 2.4GHz pc with 1GB of ram. It services 600 devices that connect to the internet. I did have to make a few customizations for it, especially with the content filtering, since we have groups of ppl that need to hit only a few sites and nothing else. It has done a great job and the load rarely gets above 35%.