Hello! Playing around with smokescreen, I noticed a potential rough edge. I'm using this command line configuration:
./smokescreen --listen-port 8888 --allow-range '192.168.0.0/16' --deny-address '192.168.1.5'
I would expect this configuration to deny access to 192.168.1.5, but allow all other addresses in the 192.168 range. However, this is not what happens. The explicitly denied address is still allowed. This curl command:
curl --proxy http://localhost:8888 http://192.168.1.5:8000/
results in these log lines:
{"allow":true,"conn_establish_time_ms":6,"content_length":928,"decision_reason":"Egress ACL is not configured","dns_lookup_time_ms":0,"enforce_would_deny":false,"id":"cs9eo7rjuspjjhc5lb70","inbound_remote_addr":"[::1]:57632","level":"info","msg":"CANONICAL-PROXY-DECISION","outbound_local_addr":"192.168.1.5:57633","outbound_remote_addr":"192.168.1.5:8000","proxy_type":"http","requested_host":"192.168.1.5:8000","start_time":"2024-10-18T23:15:43.082352Z","time":"2024-10-18T16:15:43-07:00","trace_id":""}
Interestingly, the inverse configuration using --allow-address and --deny-range works as expected. The below command allows requests to 93.184.215.14
./smokescreen --listen-port 8888 --deny-range 93.0.0.0/8 --allow-address 93.184.215.14
I'm hoping to have more time to dig into this next week. Perhaps the issue is that the allow list is always being given precedence over the deny list? If so, its probably important to document how these rules are applied. It makes more sense to have the more specific options (--allow/deny-address) to take precedence.
Hello! Playing around with smokescreen, I noticed a potential rough edge. I'm using this command line configuration:
I would expect this configuration to deny access to
192.168.1.5, but allow all other addresses in the 192.168 range. However, this is not what happens. The explicitly denied address is still allowed. This curl command:results in these log lines:
Interestingly, the inverse configuration using
--allow-addressand--deny-rangeworks as expected. The below command allows requests to 93.184.215.14I'm hoping to have more time to dig into this next week. Perhaps the issue is that the allow list is always being given precedence over the deny list? If so, its probably important to document how these rules are applied. It makes more sense to have the more specific options (
--allow/deny-address) to take precedence.