Networking Forums

Networking Forums > Computer Networking > Linux Networking > Wingate alternatives on Linux

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Wingate alternatives on Linux

 
 
Nil Einne
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      09-26-2003, 02:01 AM
Hey,

Getting annoyed with my Windows XP ‘router'/Internet sharing comp and
want to move it to Linux. I'm currently using WinGate and want to
maintain most of its functionality especially the Winsock Redirector
Service, for various reasons. However, I don't seem to be able to find
any program which offers this or something similar. Obviously, it
needs to not only offer a similar service but there needs to be a
Windows client since obviously the host computers will all be running
Windows. I'm aware of IPMasquerading of course but I would much prefer
to maintain something like the Winsock Redirector Service rather than
use NAPT/NAT.

If there is nothing, has anyone had any luck getting WinGate to work
on WINE? I suspect it won't work well, if at all and couldn't find any
mention of it either in the various compatibility databases or with
more general searches, but who knows? I've actually made a separate
post about this in the Wine group so you might want to post there but
I'll keep both threads updated.

If not, looks like I'll have to downgrade to Windows 2000 or maybe
even Windows NT4 (if I can still find it) as they were better from
what I recall.

Thanks all.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Eric Gibson
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      09-26-2003, 06:48 AM

"Nil Einne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Hey,
>
> Getting annoyed with my Windows XP 'router'/Internet sharing comp and
> want to move it to Linux. I'm currently using WinGate and want to
> maintain most of its functionality especially the Winsock Redirector
> Service, for various reasons. However, I don't seem to be able to find
> any program which offers this or something similar. Obviously, it
> needs to not only offer a similar service but there needs to be a
> Windows client since obviously the host computers will all be running
> Windows. I'm aware of IPMasquerading of course but I would much prefer
> to maintain something like the Winsock Redirector Service rather than
> use NAPT/NAT.
>
> If there is nothing, has anyone had any luck getting WinGate to work
> on WINE? I suspect it won't work well, if at all and couldn't find any
> mention of it either in the various compatibility databases or with
> more general searches, but who knows? I've actually made a separate
> post about this in the Wine group so you might want to post there but
> I'll keep both threads updated.
>
> If not, looks like I'll have to downgrade to Windows 2000 or maybe
> even Windows NT4 (if I can still find it) as they were better from
> what I recall.


Try something like http://www.smoothwall.org/ I guess. It's a linux distro
designed specifically for firewalls, it has a web based management system
and it's free. If you go to http://www.freshmeat.net/ there are a lot of
management (CGI) scripts for linux iptables/ipchains. A whole lot of them.

From what I read winsock redirector is just for wingate (which I believe
acts as a proxy and/or SOCKS firewall)... You don't need something like this
with any default linux ip masquerading setup, you just set up the linux box
as your gateway and the source machine should be able to use any port it
wants.

Eric



>
> Thanks all.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Mouse Anony
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      09-26-2003, 01:37 PM
"Eric Gibson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<kiRcb.25915$(E-Mail Removed)> ...
> Try something like http://www.smoothwall.org/ I guess. It's a linux distro
> designed specifically for firewalls, it has a web based management system
> and it's free. If you go to http://www.freshmeat.net/ there are a lot of
> management (CGI) scripts for linux iptables/ipchains. A whole lot of them.
>
> From what I read winsock redirector is just for wingate (which I believe
> acts as a proxy and/or SOCKS firewall)... You don't need something like this
> with any default linux ip masquerading setup, you just set up the linux box
> as your gateway and the source machine should be able to use any port it
> wants.


Actually Wingate has NAT (called ENS), the Winsock Redirector Service
and proxy (including socks support and transparent redirect of the
previous two to the proxies. I don't really use the proxies except
socks on some occasions. But I do use the WRS. While doing research, I
realised that it's more correctly called the WinGate Internet Client
(WGIC) which according to their homepage provides an alternative to
manual proxy server settings without the limitations that NAT (Network
Address Translation) imposes on some Internet applications. WGIC is a
simple client installation for each computer on the network. The WGIC,
in conjunction with the Gateway Discovery Protocol (GDP) and the
Winsock Redirect Protocol (WRP), provide communication between all of
the clients through the WinGate server. I don't really know enough to
try to explain how it works but it does. I think strictly speaking it
is a proxy of sorts but it only requires you to install an app in your
comp and after that everything just access the internet like normal.

I use the WGIC as my main access point on most computer with NAT as
backup. On some occasions, applications doesn't use it for some reason
(must be to do with the way they access the winsock layer) so NAT is a
very useful backup. But I prefer the WGIC since as the page says, it
enables many protocols/applications to work which don't work with NAT
for some reason (e.g. embed the IP in the data stream) to work without
requiring me to manually set up proxies, and that's assuming the app
supports them, or doing other things like port mapping etc. Also of
course it sometimes makes it easier for more then one user to use the
same app at once (or sometimes one can use NAT and the other WGIC).
Mind you, it isn't perfect of course and doesn't always work.
Sometimes, using NAT instead is better but I can easily tell the WGIC
to ignore an app so it'll use NAT. But still, overall it works well
without too much worrying in most instances if an app is going to work
and if it doesn't what do I need to do.

However, although WinGate does have a firewall, it's not really that
great, especially in protecting against trojans etc because there is
no way of application level control if you're using both the WGIC and
NAT (at least none that I can think of). Still it can be used to block
on a port basis so it protects against the real nasties like RPC. I've
tried using ZoneAlarm with WinGate but it wasn't happy. So security is
probably not as good as would be hoped.

But anyway, I digress. Thanks for your help. But it doesn't look as if
I'm going to find anything useful available yet. I say yet because I
just discovered during my research that a WinGateX is in development
for Linux. It looks likely it'll be the solution to my problems.
However, it's only in a tech preview/alpha stage so I'm expecting a
long wait :-(
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mouse Anony
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      09-26-2003, 01:37 PM
"Eric Gibson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<kiRcb.25915$(E-Mail Removed)> ...
> Try something like http://www.smoothwall.org/ I guess. It's a linux distro
> designed specifically for firewalls, it has a web based management system
> and it's free. If you go to http://www.freshmeat.net/ there are a lot of
> management (CGI) scripts for linux iptables/ipchains. A whole lot of them.
>
> From what I read winsock redirector is just for wingate (which I believe
> acts as a proxy and/or SOCKS firewall)... You don't need something like this
> with any default linux ip masquerading setup, you just set up the linux box
> as your gateway and the source machine should be able to use any port it
> wants.


Actually Wingate has NAT (called ENS), the Winsock Redirector Service
and proxy (including socks support and transparent redirect of the
previous two to the proxies. I don't really use the proxies except
socks on some occasions. But I do use the WRS. While doing research, I
realised that it's more correctly called the WinGate Internet Client
(WGIC) which according to their homepage provides an alternative to
manual proxy server settings without the limitations that NAT (Network
Address Translation) imposes on some Internet applications. WGIC is a
simple client installation for each computer on the network. The WGIC,
in conjunction with the Gateway Discovery Protocol (GDP) and the
Winsock Redirect Protocol (WRP), provide communication between all of
the clients through the WinGate server. I don't really know enough to
try to explain how it works but it does. I think strictly speaking it
is a proxy of sorts but it only requires you to install an app in your
comp and after that everything just access the internet like normal.

I use the WGIC as my main access point on most computer with NAT as
backup. On some occasions, applications doesn't use it for some reason
(must be to do with the way they access the winsock layer) so NAT is a
very useful backup. But I prefer the WGIC since as the page says, it
enables many protocols/applications to work which don't work with NAT
for some reason (e.g. embed the IP in the data stream) to work without
requiring me to manually set up proxies, and that's assuming the app
supports them, or doing other things like port mapping etc. Also of
course it sometimes makes it easier for more then one user to use the
same app at once (or sometimes one can use NAT and the other WGIC).
Mind you, it isn't perfect of course and doesn't always work.
Sometimes, using NAT instead is better but I can easily tell the WGIC
to ignore an app so it'll use NAT. But still, overall it works well
without too much worrying in most instances if an app is going to work
and if it doesn't what do I need to do.

However, although WinGate does have a firewall, it's not really that
great, especially in protecting against trojans etc because there is
no way of application level control if you're using both the WGIC and
NAT (at least none that I can think of). Still it can be used to block
on a port basis so it protects against the real nasties like RPC. I've
tried using ZoneAlarm with WinGate but it wasn't happy. So security is
probably not as good as would be hoped.

But anyway, I digress. Thanks for your help. But it doesn't look as if
I'm going to find anything useful available yet. I say yet because I
just discovered during my research that a WinGateX is in development
for Linux. It looks likely it'll be the solution to my problems.
However, it's only in a tech preview/alpha stage so I'm expecting a
long wait :-(
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael Heiming
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      09-26-2003, 06:58 PM
Mouse Anony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

[...]

> But anyway, I digress. Thanks for your help. But it doesn't look as if
> I'm going to find anything useful available yet. I say yet because I
> just discovered during my research that a WinGateX is in development
> for Linux. It looks likely it'll be the solution to my problems.
> However, it's only in a tech preview/alpha stage so I'm expecting a
> long wait :-(


From what I read, there's nothing which even the most basic Linux
setup couldn't do out of the box, on the oldest 486/586 without
using much resources.

All those "features" are build into the Linux kernel, there is even
a state-full firewall (iptables) you get for free.

Try:
http://www.tldp.org/

Search for the masquerading HOWTO.

--
Michael Heiming

Remove +SIGNS and www. if you expect an answer, sorry for
inconvenience, but I get tons of SPAM
 
Reply With Quote
 
maranatha@netnews.att.net
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      09-28-2003, 05:25 AM
Michael Heiming wrote:

> Mouse Anony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> But anyway, I digress. Thanks for your help. But it doesn't look as
>> if I'm going to find anything useful available yet. I say yet because
>> I just discovered during my research that a WinGateX is in
>> development for Linux. It looks likely it'll be the solution to my
>> problems. However, it's only in a tech preview/alpha stage so I'm
>> expecting a long wait :-(

>
> From what I read, there's nothing which even the most basic Linux
> setup couldn't do out of the box, on the oldest 486/586 without
> using much resources.
>
> All those "features" are build into the Linux kernel, there is even
> a state-full firewall (iptables) you get for free.
>
> Try:
> http://www.tldp.org/
>
> Search for the masquerading HOWTO.
>


IPCop Firewall
http://ipcop.org/cgi-bin/twiki/view/IPCop/WebHome
 
Reply With Quote
 
Leon The Peon
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      09-29-2003, 05:03 AM
"Nil Einne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Hey,



> Getting annoyed with my Windows XP 'router'/Internet sharing comp and
> want to move it to Linux. I'm currently using WinGate and want to
> maintain most of its functionality especially the Winsock Redirector
> Service, for various reasons. However, I don't seem to be able to find
> any program which offers this or something similar. Obviously, it
> needs to not only offer a similar service but there needs to be a
> Windows client since obviously the host computers will all be running
> Windows. I'm aware of IPMasquerading of course but I would much prefer
> to maintain something like the Winsock Redirector Service rather than
> use NAPT/NAT.


Hmm, yeah you would think it would be easy enough to write a proxy server
to replicate Winsock Redirector Service (=MS Proxy)

However you may be happy enough with a socks 5 server if you really needed
it.

Here's why ..


Web browsers use squid proxy .

Chat clients ( ICQ, yahoo chat, Netmeeting) use the web proxy - others can
use "socks" 4/5 proxy server.


Other programs that dont support socks would have to use masquerading
(=NAT) but I dont know what doesnt support socks that you are interested in
*and* requires a proxy to be able to receive a tcp/ip session initiatied
remotely.

(masquerading/ NAT can only work when the tcp/ip session is iniated inside
going to the outside ... )



Perhaps if you stated the reason that you really wanted winsock replicator
service, we could tell you how you are wrong to think that you require it.









---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 23/09/2003


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Alternatives to ntop that work on Linux and Windows. NetworkGuy211 Linux Networking 0 11-18-2005 02:00 PM
Firewall Service/Winsock Redirector Service alternatives on Linux? Nil Einne Linux Networking 1 02-26-2004 05:16 PM
Fetchmail & Wingate problem Jorge Laranjo Linux Networking 0 12-26-2003 09:42 PM
unable to detect Wingate Windows Networking 1 12-15-2003 07:06 AM
ftp via Wingate Ben Linux Networking 1 10-08-2003 10:54 AM



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11