DC++ search problem [resolved]

Greetings!

I’ve read all the posts about dc++ and how to configure comodo to be able to use dc++ but none of them have solved the search issue unfortanly. So my question is now can this be solved? I have create all the rules and move the above the block rule and change the settings in dc++ as the previous posts has suggested but nothing works. So can someone that have managed to get dc++ to fully work with comodo firewall (latest version, and updated) help me solve this isssue and get stuff working, especially the search function.

By the way, been using comodo for four weeks now and I just love it!

Best regards
slacker

Welcome to the Forum!

Let me ask you some questions first ;D

Does anything in your logs show what the CFP is actually blocking? Please post a sample.
Can you post a screenshot of your network rules (expand to full screen and click on the relevant rule)?
Can you also post screenshot of DC++ connection settings?
And the most important question: Are you behind a router?

Thanks :),

first of all I’m not behind a router. I’ve attached a screenhot of my DC++ connection settings and I’ve written down the network rules I’ve applied to CFP below:

------ First rule:

Action: Allow
Protocol: TCP
Direction: In

Source ip: any
Destination ip: any
Source port: any
Destination port: 16416

------ Second rule:

Action: Allow
Protocol: UDP
Direction: In

Source ip: any
Destination ip: any
Source port: any
Destination port: 15026

The TCP port 16416 is the same configured in DC++ and also the UDP port 15026, see the attached screenshot. These rules are moved up in the rules list above the standard Block rule as well.

I could not take a screenshot of the logs because there is to many apps on that have network access and the log is huge :), but there is nothing suspicious going on that I can relate to this dc++ problem.

Thanks for your help

[attachment deleted by admin]

First, try to set the Incoming connection settings in Dc++ to Direct connection. Since you have those ports opened to inbound traffic this should work. If not, post back and we’ll try to find another solution ;D

I don’t think that the CFP causes you troubles with the Search, since your rules are OK, and you said that there is nothing suspicious in the logs. To verify that (if my solution doesn’t work), try to temprary disable CFP by putting the slider in the main window to Allow all.

If there is problems with search, it’s related to UDP.
I think he should have it on “firewall with port forwarding”.
The problem can occur if you set the TCP and UDP ports to different numbers.
He should try to set both to the same port, both in DC++ and CFP.
Please report back if it works.

(Direct connection is mostly used if you leave the port boxes empty, and leave it to UPnP in windows filrewall to get it to work, The ports will be randomized if you leave them empty. CFP don’t support UPnP.)

What you said makes sense, and if my solution doesn’t work, he could try yours :).

I used the following logic: I know that Direct connection doesn’t work with ordinary firewall ;D, but if you open ports in CFP for DC++, it acts like there’s no firewall on its way…

On my system (I’m behind a NAT router) I’ve setup DC++ to connect through Firewall with UPnP, assigned one port for TCP and UDP (the same port), opened it in CFP, and it works perfectly :).

Yes it might work both ways… :wink:
I don’t have it installed at the moment, so I can’t try it… ;D
The important part is to have TCP and UDP on the same port.
Don’t ask me why… ???

Thanks to all of you!

Here is what I did, first I tested to set t the incoming connection setting in dc++ to direct connection without any success, then I tried to set the TCP and UDP ports to the same port and it worked great :), with the incoming connection setting in dc++ on direct connection. Thanks alot, but what was the reason to set the UDP and TCP port to the same number? And one other thing, after the search has worked a bit I get UDP Flood attempt in the log, this is when I for instans searched for “.iso” which many records in the result, but searching for something else with smaller amount of result don’t result in the UDP Flood entry in the log.

//slacker

I’m glad that it works!

Who knows ??? ? In fact, I tried to use two different ports on my machine, and it works :o ???. Although I usualy use a single port, I just tried this for testing.

I also see those UDP floods sometime, but not very often. If this bothers you, I remember someone suggested to raze the UDP Flood Trafic rate in Advanced Attack Detection and Prevention.
But I’m not expert in flood attacks ;D. Maybe someone with more experience will give you a better answer…

Yes, you can increase the default 50 to something higher.
Just try anything like 150 and see if it’s enough.
You have to go by trial and error.
Don’t have it any higher than necessary, so you have some UDP flood detection left.

okej, great :), thanks again.

You’re welcome.
I will put resolved on this thread and lock it.
If you have more to add, you can PM me.
If it’s another subject, just start a new thread.
Good luck. :slight_smile: