Hi,
I just discovered that Android 12 update broke my work VPN connection via Cisco AnyConnect app.
Now AnyConnect is opening only links with IP addresses and won't connect to links with local domains such as mycompany.local/something.
On my other phone that still runs Android 11, everything works great.
I tried to reinstall AnyConnect and to clear data and cache for this app, but that doesn't help at all.
Is this another Android 12 exclusive security feature?
@almirsahbaz
At least since the development of mDNS usage of ".local" domains in environments with some degree of infrastructure aren't suggested anymore (i know that there was a time, the ".local" was proclaimes as a security featurer itself... but times are changeing).
Looking around i found a handful of other posts where problems occured regarding resolving .local domains on android 12.
It might be that Android 12 had made some changes on how to deal with mDNS / .local-Domains. I assume that your company network usually uses "normal" dns. And that's where it get's troublesome.
How ever: As far as i can see you might try to take a look with wireshark or something on your device what actually is going on. Another way would to talk to your IT department. If this is an intended behaviour of Android 12, which i personally assume, then it might have some impact on them and they will need to act sooner or later.
Related
I have gone through the steps in the development post for [Module] tun.ko for stock 2.6.32.9 (for openvpn/vpnc/etc), http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1013513. I am still unable to connect to my companies Cisco VPN router. I have rooted my Atrix and confirmed that tun.ko is running. Every time I try VPN Connections, it will not connect with no response after an attempt. I have also tried VPNC Widget which tells me "0:unexpected operatorError: root access missing! Waringin:'Advanced Routing' feature missing - VPN Conectivity might be lost after a while"
VPN access is all I am missing to get RDP working, at least I hope as I can use it on my home domain with my Windows server.
I am somewhat new to Android devices, other than tinkering with my old AT&T Tilt with Android 2.2 on NAND. Any help to resolve is much appreciated.
I am still unable to connect through my company's VPN. I have found out that we use a Cisco 3000 Concentrator. If anyone else has had luck with this model, I would like to hear about it.
I had a lot of issues getting mine to work too..
After hours of hunting and lots of logcats later I figured out VPNConnections is very picky about your busybox version. Something to do with the output of the ps command.
Check this thread (Mostly my last two posts on page 5): http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=13859822
Cliff Notes version:
I got it working with VPN Connections .6, Busybox 1.17.1, and the tun.ko posted by rozzco in that thread.
BB 1.17.1 is available from Stericsons BB installer under alternate versions.
If you need the APK for it or the VPN app lemme know and I'll post it.
FWIW, I never got VPNC widget to work. I had your same error,
I tried your suggestions, using the specific versions. Still no luck. Look at logcat, it appears to attempt to connect but ultimately finishes with "process stderr: no response from target".
scoob8000 do you know what VPN device through which you are connecting? I don't know if it is a issue with the Cisco VPN 3000 Concentrator we are using. There was a mention of retiring the device, but they do not know when or with what it will be replaced.
Did you try this one?
http://code.google.com/p/get-a-robot-vpnc/
That is the VPN Connections app scoob8000 has mentioned.
rgbaxter said:
I tried your suggestions, using the specific versions. Still no luck. Look at logcat, it appears to attempt to connect but ultimately finishes with "process stderr: no response from target".
scoob8000 do you know what VPN device through which you are connecting? I don't know if it is a issue with the Cisco VPN 3000 Concentrator we are using. There was a mention of retiring the device, but they do not know when or with what it will be replaced.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From memory I think it's juist a old 26xx series router.. (Don't quote me on this lol)
It almost sounds like your at least hitting the network. Can anyone try to see your attempted connections on the concentrator?
Working IPSEC VPN Client for Cisco VPN Concentrator
I know this is an old thread, but thought I would post an update anyway.
I recently started looking for a VPN client I could use with our Cisco VPM Concentrator, and ran across the one mentioned in this topic, VPN Connections. I installed it from the same link also posted by lhurtado earlier.
I think this may be a newer version than what was available at that time, though. Either way, I've got it working without any issues, and I'm able to VPN into my network, and use RDP without any issues.
I did try this on a non-rooted Asus Transformer TF-101, and it did not work. I only got a "Failed to Connect" message in VPN Connections. I'll have to see if I can find the logcat mentioned previously for any information on why it is failing, but I'm guessing the stock Kernel/ROM does not have tun.ko.
Here's the specs on what I've got:
Acer Iconia A500 (rooted), custom ROM (Taboonay 2.2) and Kernel (HoneyVillain 3.4)
BusyBox 1.19.2
VPN Connections 0.99
2X Client
Cisco VPN Concentrator 3005
Hope this helps someone else who is looking for a VPN client that works with the Cisco VPN Concentrators.
As long as your kernel support tap/tun configs, you can use the VPN Widget. I use it with our cisco equipment at the hospital I work for. It works like a champ! You will need to get your information to get it to work properly but its the only one I have found so far to work out of the box (with the proper kernel).
As for the OP, being this is an old thread I sure he gave up- however if he was trying to RDP using the hostname, that is not possible (without hackery). Always use your IP until we have CIFS support. NetBIOS name are not resolved on a linux platform without it. I use RDP/VNC with my VPN over 4G almost daily.
Beating a dead horse
OK...First off, thank you to everyone for looking into this.
I'm a Network Engineer that has the pleasure of supporting a Cisco 3030 VPN Concentrator from the stone age. For those with Iphones we just give the Facutly/Staff the IPSEC/PSK and use the native VPN client and all is well.
The Androids (which I'm a die hard fan of) don't work....UNTIL version 4.0.x arrived.
There is an app called VPNCILLA (or for those rooted VPN WIDGET) that works with the old style concentrators. VPNCILLA has a 10 day trial, but afterward is a $4.95 one time fee.
They both work flawlessly and are easily setup.
Just wanted to pass the word in case the one person in the world out there is still trying to get it to work (like me).
Thanks
Shayne
I wanted to implement the application specific VPN client in android, that is vpn connection once established should be only available to our application and rest of the apps in android device should make use of normal internet connection.
To elaborate my need more, i have an application already which connects to corporate email, files and other data from internet normally but for some security reason we need it to be go through tunnel within our application and access everything within via tunnel basically want we are looking here is security while accessing company corporate network.
Since we are new to something like this we don't have a hint on how to start what protocols to use etc (we are assuming ipsec l2tp for now), any information, hint or redirects to useful resource will be really helpful.
And between we are just looking to send and receive data over tunnel, there is nothing more or need to control computer on the network all we need is to route data through corporate firewall and should support multiple vpn servers such as cisco, microsoft etc. Can any one say how complex or how feasible to implement it.
If your goal is just for establishing a secure connection and not controlling other computers or resource on network how about going with SSL encryption.
You are asking about complexity and i assume you are naive with this technology, as per my knowledge its quite a complex and may account to as big as your present application, Here are few pointers as you may look into: Split tunneling, Low level Network protocols, feasibility of implementation depends on size of your team and their expertise level in socket programming and remember your attempting to accomplish something which is already built into most of the OS and more complex. one of our dev team worked on split tunneling for months finally gave up since client settled for non PPTP application
__________________
Dave
Current Device: Samsung Galaxy Nexus
Fed up of bricking devices
I was trolling thru the settings and saw there's a built in VPN that can be used is it worth it or is this one that Verizon has control over and would just hand over your info to the mafiaa anyway ? Anyone know more about this or have you used it yet ?
It's just a remote access client. Stock Android comes with one, which you can still use here, LG has provided a more advanced one that has better compatibility with more advanced forms of IPSec encryption, haven't really played with it to see what else it does.
I highly doubt that Verizon has instructed LG to intentionally compromise the security of their VPN client, the legal ramifications alone would make this a very foolish decision, even for Big Red. The security of the traffic sent over the tunnel depends on what type of encryption was used, and we can't currently be positive that there is a type of encryption out there the NSA can't crack, they don't need Verizon's help to do so.
What type of VPN are you trying to connect to? If this is corporate or educational the security of the traffic isn't your responsibility anyway.
I just use the stock Android on. I have been using it for years so I stuck with it. I played with the LG one but for what I need, the stock is all I need. I use it to stream movies to me phone from my home server and I can access my drives.
Sent from my VZW LG G3 (tapatalk)
I never used it before and all I would need it for would be the occasional stream when Netflix don't have something. So I guess the LG one would work just fine. I didn't know much about there VPN being on he in the first place or android. So thanx I leaned a bit tonight. ?
And ya I know all about if the nsa wants you they'll get you lol. Which is why I won't even step near anything like Expendables. Lions gate is like a pack of wild dogs going after people right now. ?
Given the actions of our Broadband and Cellular companies over the last few years, i have decided i wont use my computer and phone without a VPN. They have no right snooping.
I use VYPRVPN and i have tried many Vpn services over the last 2 years. VyprVpn seems to be the best bang for the Buck and the have the fastest speeds and a large amount of servers. Two things that separate Vypr from all the other VPN services is they use their own proprietary Protocol called Chameleon Protocol which is built on top of OpenVPN. It adds another 256bit layer of encryption on top of OpenVpns 256bit encryption and keeps our ISP's from knowing if were are using a VPN at all. The other added Benefit is they use their own DNS servers and detect and prevent DNS leakage also built in kill switches for in case you loose your VPN connection for what ever reason it will disable your internet all together to keep whatever you were working on from leaking out for prying eyes. They do minimal logging. They would prefer you not to do any torrenting but they dont block you from torrenting. But if you are someone who likes to torrent then use a server outside the US that doesn't have strict piracy laws.
Like i said i have used many VPN services and VyprVPN is by far the best ive ever used. There are tons of perks that others cant come close to offering. I have the premier plan and its worth it.
YES VPN IS WORTH IT. Anonymity is a must for me and should be for everyone else. What i do with my connection is none of anyone else's business. Especially since i pay a buttload of money to have internet. Hope that helps.
jmotyka said:
YES VPN IS WORTH IT. Anonymity is a must for me and should be for everyone else. What i do with my connection is none of anyone else's business. Especially since i pay a buttload of money to have internet. Hope that helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My ISP (Sonic.net) allows VPN if you have a valid account.
The LG VPN works fine. Still getting LTE speeds through their backbone.
I guess I'll keep VPN enable permanently.
Sounds good. Now to learn how to use it properly lol. But ya my thoughts exactly no one needs to see what I have on my connection but me. And with all the snooping going on and intrusive adds grabbing info to see what sites you visit just to send you relevant adds (cough cough ) it's a great idea.
Most routers support VPN so its free to setup and easy to do
Sent from my VZW LG G3 (tapatalk)
Hi all. Trying to get the lg VPN going but I've only ever set one up for my home comps n they basica9did everything for you. One click setup so to speak.
I got to name the VPN then it asks for the ip address but is that my ip or the one I want it to show (masked) ?gotta admit I don't know much bout this lol thanx in advance guys .
VPN on Android
VPN on Android has kind of been a sore subject since KitKat. I used to connect to L2TP on Mac OS X Server (snow leopard) from my phones as far back as Gingerbread, but with KitKat, L2TP became incompatible with Apple's implementation. That being said, PPTP works fine although being slightly less secure than L2TP. Android connects just fine to my Ubuntu Server PPTP, but no matter what I do I can not get get OpenSwan (Linux L2TP) to work outside my local LAN. Considering I have the EXACT same problem with OS X L2TP over the Internet but iOS devices can still manage to "phone home" to my L2TP server, I'm sure has something to do with my ISP considering L2TP an "enterprise" application and blocking my traffic, but iOS devices use some form of non-standard/undocumented L2TP.
I use VPN all the time for the simple fact that it provides a secure tunnel back home so I can grab files off my server, etc. Not only that, but it's a good way to provide at least some security when using public wifi. The thought of using public wifi without VPN gives me chills. It is disappointing that Android has deemed PPTP not secure enough to enable "always on vpn", which would tunnel 100% of your data through your VPN whenever a data connection (4G or WiFi) are available.
I am running a rooted LGA V400 tablet with Android 4.4.2 Kernel version 3.4.0+, software version v40010e and build number KOT49l.A1403851534. The tablet does not have provisions for a data connection via a SIM card- wifi only.
I am using the connections tab in eolwral OS monitor to keep track of what connections the various applications and the OS are making with the outside i.e.. via wi-fi. I also am running AFWall + to shut down phone home garbage. I had Droidwall installed before this. Neither Droidwall nor AFWall + shut down non whitelisted connections......
As normal course of operation the ONLY applications I whitelist are
Firefox
GMail
Google+
GPS Status
Internet (the built in browser)
Kaspersky Internet Security
Maps
Navigator
Skype
Speedtest
Sun, Moon & Planets
UCBrowserHD.
As I am writing this the tablet has an uptime of 1 hr 42 minutes. The only existing connection to the internet according to OSMonitor is Youtube through 127.0.0.1:42818. Youtube is NOT whitelisted. Also please note that I am composing this post on my laptop.
If I restart the tablet things change radically. I have 19 connections either syn_sent, time_wait,Listening or Established. Most are from System although there are things like Google Account Manager (not whitelisted) Qualcom, Youtube (again) and things like Google Input Services. On the first boot of the day its is worse with more of the system connections to various IP's in various states, Kernel connections (not whitelisted) App updates(not whitelisted), Google backup Transport and its group (not whitelisted), Google Partner Setup ( not whitelisted), Hidden Person Menu (not whitelisted), Software Update (not whitelisted), and a group of others appear which are not whitelisted.
My questions are-
. If either Droidwall or AFWall+ are true IPTables firewalls how and why is all of this crap able to get on wifi?
When transport for a certain service is not available i.e. blocked by a firewall does Android do something different with the connection request to enable it i.e. the plethora of system connections? It appears to me that AFWall+ isn't working as advertised because of f these leakers-
Most of the connections appear at boot up- is what is happening that these connections are established before AFWall+ gets up and running and it does not have the ability to close them? Note that on boot up after the GUI is running I get a SuperSU notification that AFWall + has been granted root permission so I am curious about the order of things starting i.e. a lot of the connection sockets being established before the firewall is running.
Finally- the V400 is somewhat of a stepchild. Is there another version of Android I can load on this platform that will work?
Thanks to all for the expertise here. I searched the forum before posting this as well as the internet, I am experienced with Unix and Linux and have done IPTables in non Android OS'es. I find what I am seeing here disturbing. Any help or suggestions would be deeply appreciated.
Expat.
I want the application I am developing to use the Wi-Fi and Mobile Data (cellular) interfaces simultaneously on my Android 11 Galaxy Tab S7 5G device. The setting "Mobile data always active" does indeed allow fast interface-changeover. However, both interfaces are never data-accessible simultaneously. Using a third-party channel-bonding VPN service, called Speedify, this is possible on this Galaxy Tab S7 5G tablet. Speedify uses something mysterious called channel bonding with their VPN service to accomplish this. Also, a Google Pixel running Android 11 is also able to use both interfaces simultaneously, without any third-party utility help. In addition, the Garmin ActiveCaptain App also, somehow, gives this tablet the ability to communicate on both interfaces, simultaneously. How can my application use both interfaces on a Galaxy Tab S7 5G without using the Speedify App (not possible because of security and business reasons)?
Did you get anywhere with this?
How have you verified the Garmin app has this functionality? And when are both interfaces used? I wonder if only one channel has a typical data connection, and the other is for some other purpose (location, or something).
I think Speedify gets around the usual OS limitations by creating a single virtual device that all requests go through, then they decide which network to send packets on. It is neat to hear this can work on a mobile device though! I had assumed their service was for people on more typical PC like hardware.
In a way I'm not surprised Google's own phone has managed some tricks others haven't. Though I'd hope it wasn't an Android 11 only feature (meaning 12+ don't/won't have it).
This assumption of only cell or wifi being active might be baked in at an OS level to force better battery life. Personally I like flexibility and choice, but I can imagine less knowledgeable users getting angry at their terrible battery life (after they enable a feature they don't understand).
Maybe this is worth filing a bug with Android and seeing what they say? Or asking Samsung directly?
I was bummed when I figured out I couldn't just pay two ISP's for internet service and load balance across both easily. That my consumer router's optional 2nd WAN port was only a failover option (use one or the other).
As you alluded, for Samsung phones and tablets running Android 11 or Android 12, the ultimate solution is to route both WiFi and Mobile Data (cellular) data through a virtual interface e.g. tun0, via a VPN tunnel interface. I believe this will "shield" the Samsung one-or-the other route-switching that prevents simultaneous operation over both WiFi and Mobile Data. I am assembling just such a VPN now. I could certainly use any tips or suggestions from others that have already been down this road.