Added FWD_PERMIT_ANY_HOST to add the ability to use an asterisk to #44
+10
−4
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
mean any hostname matches in a PermitOpen rule. This is simple and
looks like this:
PermitOpen *:443
One use case here is when OpenSSH is used to broker connectivity to
a specific TCP based service in a trusted network when the client
is in an untrusted network. This allows a simple configuration that
can allow all forwards to service X without the need to provide a
large list of every server on the trusted network in the sshd_config
file. Doing doing so is impractical when the trusted network is
larger than a few hosts as a large list of hosts in sshd_config
would be unwieldy and would need to be updated constantly if the
trusted network changes often.
This is a real use case for me- I need to provide this type of
access to several thousand systems. In any given week there
might be 2-3 new servers and there might be 2-3 servers that have
been decommissioned.
This patch is a huge improvement over allowing all ports to all
hosts, which is all that I can do at this point without having
a huge management headache. I was very surprised this wasn't
supported alongside FWD_PERMIT_ANY_PORT. It's a simple enough
change. I wonder if there was any debate on this or if it just
slipped through the cracks as an uncommon use case?
Note that this doesn't go down the more complex road of allowing
more finegrained cases. The '*' is NOT actually a pattern, it is
a symbol that means any host. Using *.bah.org will not work and
is not intended to work.