I am trying to configure webhook connection to my server but smooch is not able to connect( firewall policies). I need to allow smooch IP but the ping test returns different IP address all the times.
Is there any set of IP(s) which I can allow in the firewall directly?
Smooch does not currently have a static set of IPs from which it sends webhooks, but the team is actively working on supporting this.
If you absolutely need static IPs in the meantime to bypass your firewall, you would need to host your own server outside the firewall that relays Smooch webhooks from a static IP that you've configured yourself. Then, configure Smooch to send webhooks to your proxy server instead of your real server.
Related
I am just experimenting with my phone system and I'm wondering how both endpoints know they are on the same LAN, I have both endpoints breaking out to the cloud phone system with two separate public IP addresses, I've segmented them off from each other with a firewall so they can't see each other however every time I attempt a call between the two end points the call is setup as a peer to peer call and attempts to traverse the local LAN via RTP through the firewall, the firewall blocks the RTP communication and the call has no audio.
I am just wondering how both endpoints are realizing they are behind the same firewall/router since they are both registering with the cloud system from different public IP addresses, I wanted the call to be bridged in the cloud and not traverse the local LAN but somehow both endpoints only attempt the call over the LAN every single time and no idea how they're realising they're on the same LAN.
Anyone else encountered this before?
SIP endpoints don't have to know they are on the same LAN. They just make best use of the IP addresses you provide.
Your INVITE request will provide more insight, but from what you write my guess is that you use public IP addresses for your contact/request URI and local IP addresses in your SDP offer. The local IP addresses are probably routable through the firewall.
With ICE and STUN endpoints may select the best IPs for media traffic - but for that to work the RTP/STUN packets should be able to traverse the firewall in your LAN.
Attempts to communicate directly may mean that LAN uses IPs from public ranges or endpoints a SIP proxy were not smart enough to detect NAT in front of your LAN.
I'm trying to set up my Ec2 server on AWS, and I want to make it so only requests from the same ip address are allowed (for my backend port.). What security group allows this? The reason I want to restrict which ips can make requests to the backend is to stop abuse ips from making a ton of random requests.
I'm trying to implement a web server on my pc, connected to router.
Since my PC is connected to router, It identifies private IP address, starting with
192.168...
However,it could not accept any clients that is not connected to the same router, even I specified tried with public IP address.
Is it possible to implement Web server that can be accept clients from anywhere with my PC connected to local router?
Or should I connect my web server directly to public IP directly without router?
It'll be pleasure to learn from your answers.
The problem may be, that your web server routing may not be configured correctly to your external IP, or your web server ports may be blocked, or another possibility is that your firewall is blocking your service connections outside the local network.
So, a solution to misconfiguration would be, to forward your port to your internal IP of the web server from your router menu.
And, for the case of firewall blocking, you may give special access to your web server through the firewall by setting inbound and outbound rules.
And if all that is correct then most probably your ISP(Internet Service Provider) is not allowing ports to be opened to you, maybe due to dynamic IP or service restrictions.
For the similar problem, you may refer to my answer to another post Here
What router do you have? go into the router using a web browser, mine is 192.168.0.1 with username and password as admin. or username admin, password blank.
Then set a dmz route or for port forwarding 80 to you own internal IP address.
My .Net website uses WebClient to download a resource from another server. I am receiving "403 forbidden" responses from the remote server.
I think there is some sort of firewall issue as the requests work from my home development environment but the same requests are refused when my site is deployed to a web hosting company. I want to find the IP address that the refused requests originate from.
My question is this: is there a way to programatically find the actual source IP Address used by WebClient when it made the request?
I know the public IP address of my website but this might not be the same address WebClient would use for outgoing traffic. Unfortunately I have very limited access to the hosting company shared server and can't see any IIS logs or any other logs of incoming or outgoing traffic. Hence I am trying to get this IP address programatically.
I have seen SO questions on how to request a specific outgoing IP using BindIPEndPointCallback, but none on how to discover an actual actual IP used.
I'm using a DNS service and so far I've successfully hid my server's IP address from appearing to the public (including nslookup to all my subdomains).
The only problem is that my server's IP is still showing in the email header of every sent email. Is there a way to hide it from appearing or change it to something else?
I'm using CloudFlare service, as for my email service I'm using qmail.
Why do you want to hide your SMTP server? I don't believe it's possible to hide your IP completely because the receiving server has to know where the connection is coming from for TCP/IP to work (in the same way that your browser has to know an ip address for google.com to load the page). So the receiving server will always know the ip address even if you don't put it in a header.
There are many services that provide SMTP servers if you do not want to use your own and expose it to the world. I'd recommend exploring these options if privacy or security is a concern.