Skip to main content

Remote Access VPN (IPsec) - ASA - part two

In my previous post I configured the remote access IPsec VPN on ASA and today I’d like to change some settings. I added one more router which will play a role of a www server.

asa-ra-ipsec2-1.jpg

In my last scenario all traffic was sent over the tunnel:

asa-ra-ipsec6.jpg 

and today I need to separate the traffic in two categories: first one - protected and it should be sent over the tunnel; second one - can be sent over the Internet. On my updated network diagram you can see R16 /192.168.202.222/. Assume it is a www server, and we should be able to access it not via the VPN tunnel. The traffic to servers behind the ASA have to be protected.

First I add a new access list:
 
asa1(config)# access-list SPLIT-TUN standard permit host 192.168.202.222

next, I need to change group policy settings:
 
group-policy VPN-GP attributes
 split-tunnel-policy excludespecified
 split-tunnel-network-list value SPLIT-TUN

I try now to establish the VPN connection.

On the ASA I see the access list associated with split tunneling and split tunneling policy:

Dec 10 07:27:56 [IKEv1 DEBUG]Group = VPN-ASA, Username = cisco, IP = 192.168.202.232, IKEGetUserAttributes: split tunneling list = SPLIT-TUN
Dec 10 07:27:56 [IKEv1 DEBUG]Group = VPN-ASA, Username = cisco, IP = 192.168.202.232, IKEGetUserAttributes: Split Tunneling Policy = Local Lan

Now I should be able to send traffic to the host 192.168.202.222 but there is one problem:

asa-ra-ipsec2-2.jpg

When we look at the second tab you can notice that one (mandatory !!!) parameter is not enabled (Local LAN: disabled):

asa-ra-ipsec2-3.jpg

Let’s fix it:

asa-ra-ipsec2-4.jpg

and connect once again:

asa-ra-ipsec2-5.jpg

As you see now this one IP address is excluded from encryption domain. On the client side you can also find following logs:

asa-ra-ipsec2-6.jpg

Let’s send some traffic to check if it works as expected:

asa-ra-ipsec2-7.jpg

Now I test if I can ping hosts behind the ASA:

asa-ra-ipsec2-8.jpg

So, everything works fine.

I’d like to mention about one thing. Assume the host 9.9.9.9 is a www server in DMZ and you don’t need to protect the traffic between client and this server. You can add this IP to the access list (SPLIT-TUN) and the traffic will not be encrypted:

asa1(config)# access-list SPLIT-TUN standard permit host 9.9.9.9
 
 
asa-ra-ipsec2-9.jpg

now let’s send some traffic to the host 9.9.9.9:

asa-ra-ipsec2-10.jpg

As you see everything is working as expected. You can exclude the traffic from the VPN tunnel which is directed to host in different location but also to the LAN just behind the VPN server.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What should you know about HA 'override enabled' setting on Fortigate?

High availability is mandatory in most of today's network designs. Only very small companies or branches can run their business without redundancy. When you have Fortigate firewall in your network you have many options to increase network availability. You can use Fortigate Clustering Protocol ( FGCP ) or Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol ( VRRP ). FGCP has two modes: 'override' disabled (default) and 'override' enabled . I'm not going to explain how to set up HA as you can find many resources on Fortinet websites: https://cookbook.fortinet.com/high-availability-two-fortigates-56/ https://cookbook.fortinet.com/high-availability-with-fgcp-56/ Let's recap what is the main difference between them. The default HA setting is 'override' disabled and this is an order of selection an active unit: 1) number of monitored interfaces - when both units have the same number of working (up) interfaces check next parameter 2) HA uptime - an

FortiGate and GRE tunnel

Recently I worked on one project where a client requested to re-route web traffic to the GRE tunnel to perform traffic inspection. I would like to share with you what is required if you configure it on FortiGate. We need a new GRE interface and policy base routing (PBR) to change the route for specific source IPs. Of course you need firewall policies to permit the traffic. Let's start with GRE interface. Unfortunately you can't configure it using the GUI, only CLI is the option: config system gre-tunnel edit "gre1" set interface "port1" set local-gw 55.55.55.55 set remote-gw 44.44.44.44 next end When the end peer is Cisco router, you need to set the IP for the GRE interface: config system interface edit gre1 set ip 192.168.10.10 255.255.255.255 set remote-ip192.168.10.20 end In next step we need to fix routing. We need the alternate path via GRE but to keep the route in the active routing table you need to set the same AD (adminis

Inpection of asymmetric sessions on FortiGate

There is one feature available on FortiGate, and I think you should know it, as it modifies a bit what we know about stateful firewalls. In past every packet was treated individually and you had to create policies in both directions. With stateful firewalls we can track connections, and by checking couple of attributes, we can treat them as part of the same session. For example when you initiate connection from a host1 to host2, the returning connection from host2 to host1 will be treated as part of the same connection (session). They have to have the same source/destination and destination/source IPs, port numbers and interfaces.There is an exception from this rule and FortiGate in some specific cases can accept connections on port which was not used in the initial connection. Let me explain how it works on the below example:      The host1 has a default gateway on R1 (10.0.1.2), but you may notice that it is not the optimal path to host2 subnet. When we analyze the packet flo