Bind docker container ports only to specific outside server address Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Come Celebrate our 10 Year Anniversary!How do I deploy a docker container and associated data container, including contents?UDP Traffic from outside to docker container is dropped after container restartTransparent proxying a single docker container to another docker containerSteps for limiting outside connections to docker container with iptables?Docker's iptables=false option seems to have not the desired behaviorOpen ports to Docker containersdocker containers won't connect to DNS server containerDropping external connections to Docker container with iptablesHow can I find the docker-machine network adapter name for a docker container?iptables and Docker - allow only specific port mappings

What's the purpose of writing one's academic bio in 3rd person?

Is the argument below valid?

Super Attribute Position on Product Page Magento 1

Why are there no cargo aircraft with "flying wing" design?

Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?

Letter Boxed validator

What is a Meta algorithm?

Did Kevin spill real chili?

Sorting numerically

Does surprise arrest existing movement?

Is it ethical to give a final exam after the professor has quit before teaching the remaining chapters of the course?

How do I mention the quality of my school without bragging

Storing hydrofluoric acid before the invention of plastics

What is the correct way to use the pinch test for dehydration?

Is there a documented rationale why the House Ways and Means chairman can demand tax info?

Is a manifold-with-boundary with given interior and non-empty boundary essentially unique?

What's the difference between `auto x = vector<int>()` and `vector<int> x`?

What do you call a phrase that's not an idiom yet?

How can I make names more distinctive without making them longer?

Withdrew £2800, but only £2000 shows as withdrawn on online banking; what are my obligations?

What is the longest distance a 13th-level monk can jump while attacking on the same turn?

List *all* the tuples!

Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg?

What does the "x" in "x86" represent?



Bind docker container ports only to specific outside server address



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
Come Celebrate our 10 Year Anniversary!How do I deploy a docker container and associated data container, including contents?UDP Traffic from outside to docker container is dropped after container restartTransparent proxying a single docker container to another docker containerSteps for limiting outside connections to docker container with iptables?Docker's iptables=false option seems to have not the desired behaviorOpen ports to Docker containersdocker containers won't connect to DNS server containerDropping external connections to Docker container with iptablesHow can I find the docker-machine network adapter name for a docker container?iptables and Docker - allow only specific port mappings



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;








2















This is the first time i address such a network "problem" to solve with docker and i need some inputs.



This is my situation:



  • Ubuntu 14.04 running NginX, ufw as firewall and docker containers to run a PHP backend application.


  • Ufw default policy is set to DROP for both INPUT and OUTPUT, as well as for FORWARD.


  • sysctl rule: net.ipv4.conf.all.forwarding = 0


My need:



  • a container running in daemon mode, with port 8888/tcp which accept connections from the outside but ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8 and, also, port 4444/tcp which listen from localhost

My problem:



Ufw is set to accept incoming connections on port 8888/tcp ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8. Hence, basically:



sudo ufw allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp


Then, i run the container with:



docker run -p 8888:8888/tcp -p 127.0.0.1:4444:4444/tcp [other options ]


Afterwards, running nmap -p 8888 45.45.45.45 from a machine which have NOT the ip = 8.8.8.8, i expect to get port filtered.
But....



Host is up (0.056s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp open unknown


I have then tried to run the container again without -p 8888:8888/tcp and then i tried to run again the nmap, and...



Host is up (0.061s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown


Therefore, it seems that, correct me if i am wrong, docker rules override ufw's ones.



I have then searched a way to allow incoming traffic in a container only from a specific address, and i found something like:



iptables -I DOCKER -i ext_if ! -s 8.8.8.8 -j DROP


And it worked:



PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 15.05 seconds


My question is then:



is the solution above right for my case? i mean: acting like above, i am overriding ufw rule allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp with a docker rule that says "expose ports only if traffic comes from ip 8.8.8.8 " ... is this the right approach?



would not be better to leave ufw do the "bad work" of drop unwanted packets and then just forward traffic from filtered ports to docker? is there a way to do this?



I would avoid this solution because being an iptable rule of the DOCKER chain, that rule involves all the containers i currently have or i will have.



Thank you.










share|improve this question
























  • Could you provide output of iptables-save? When Docker starts it modifies iptables rules in order to ensure mapping to ports that should be open.

    – Tombart
    Jan 31 '16 at 11:12

















2















This is the first time i address such a network "problem" to solve with docker and i need some inputs.



This is my situation:



  • Ubuntu 14.04 running NginX, ufw as firewall and docker containers to run a PHP backend application.


  • Ufw default policy is set to DROP for both INPUT and OUTPUT, as well as for FORWARD.


  • sysctl rule: net.ipv4.conf.all.forwarding = 0


My need:



  • a container running in daemon mode, with port 8888/tcp which accept connections from the outside but ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8 and, also, port 4444/tcp which listen from localhost

My problem:



Ufw is set to accept incoming connections on port 8888/tcp ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8. Hence, basically:



sudo ufw allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp


Then, i run the container with:



docker run -p 8888:8888/tcp -p 127.0.0.1:4444:4444/tcp [other options ]


Afterwards, running nmap -p 8888 45.45.45.45 from a machine which have NOT the ip = 8.8.8.8, i expect to get port filtered.
But....



Host is up (0.056s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp open unknown


I have then tried to run the container again without -p 8888:8888/tcp and then i tried to run again the nmap, and...



Host is up (0.061s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown


Therefore, it seems that, correct me if i am wrong, docker rules override ufw's ones.



I have then searched a way to allow incoming traffic in a container only from a specific address, and i found something like:



iptables -I DOCKER -i ext_if ! -s 8.8.8.8 -j DROP


And it worked:



PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 15.05 seconds


My question is then:



is the solution above right for my case? i mean: acting like above, i am overriding ufw rule allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp with a docker rule that says "expose ports only if traffic comes from ip 8.8.8.8 " ... is this the right approach?



would not be better to leave ufw do the "bad work" of drop unwanted packets and then just forward traffic from filtered ports to docker? is there a way to do this?



I would avoid this solution because being an iptable rule of the DOCKER chain, that rule involves all the containers i currently have or i will have.



Thank you.










share|improve this question
























  • Could you provide output of iptables-save? When Docker starts it modifies iptables rules in order to ensure mapping to ports that should be open.

    – Tombart
    Jan 31 '16 at 11:12













2












2








2


1






This is the first time i address such a network "problem" to solve with docker and i need some inputs.



This is my situation:



  • Ubuntu 14.04 running NginX, ufw as firewall and docker containers to run a PHP backend application.


  • Ufw default policy is set to DROP for both INPUT and OUTPUT, as well as for FORWARD.


  • sysctl rule: net.ipv4.conf.all.forwarding = 0


My need:



  • a container running in daemon mode, with port 8888/tcp which accept connections from the outside but ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8 and, also, port 4444/tcp which listen from localhost

My problem:



Ufw is set to accept incoming connections on port 8888/tcp ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8. Hence, basically:



sudo ufw allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp


Then, i run the container with:



docker run -p 8888:8888/tcp -p 127.0.0.1:4444:4444/tcp [other options ]


Afterwards, running nmap -p 8888 45.45.45.45 from a machine which have NOT the ip = 8.8.8.8, i expect to get port filtered.
But....



Host is up (0.056s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp open unknown


I have then tried to run the container again without -p 8888:8888/tcp and then i tried to run again the nmap, and...



Host is up (0.061s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown


Therefore, it seems that, correct me if i am wrong, docker rules override ufw's ones.



I have then searched a way to allow incoming traffic in a container only from a specific address, and i found something like:



iptables -I DOCKER -i ext_if ! -s 8.8.8.8 -j DROP


And it worked:



PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 15.05 seconds


My question is then:



is the solution above right for my case? i mean: acting like above, i am overriding ufw rule allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp with a docker rule that says "expose ports only if traffic comes from ip 8.8.8.8 " ... is this the right approach?



would not be better to leave ufw do the "bad work" of drop unwanted packets and then just forward traffic from filtered ports to docker? is there a way to do this?



I would avoid this solution because being an iptable rule of the DOCKER chain, that rule involves all the containers i currently have or i will have.



Thank you.










share|improve this question
















This is the first time i address such a network "problem" to solve with docker and i need some inputs.



This is my situation:



  • Ubuntu 14.04 running NginX, ufw as firewall and docker containers to run a PHP backend application.


  • Ufw default policy is set to DROP for both INPUT and OUTPUT, as well as for FORWARD.


  • sysctl rule: net.ipv4.conf.all.forwarding = 0


My need:



  • a container running in daemon mode, with port 8888/tcp which accept connections from the outside but ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8 and, also, port 4444/tcp which listen from localhost

My problem:



Ufw is set to accept incoming connections on port 8888/tcp ONLY from ip 8.8.8.8. Hence, basically:



sudo ufw allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp


Then, i run the container with:



docker run -p 8888:8888/tcp -p 127.0.0.1:4444:4444/tcp [other options ]


Afterwards, running nmap -p 8888 45.45.45.45 from a machine which have NOT the ip = 8.8.8.8, i expect to get port filtered.
But....



Host is up (0.056s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp open unknown


I have then tried to run the container again without -p 8888:8888/tcp and then i tried to run again the nmap, and...



Host is up (0.061s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown


Therefore, it seems that, correct me if i am wrong, docker rules override ufw's ones.



I have then searched a way to allow incoming traffic in a container only from a specific address, and i found something like:



iptables -I DOCKER -i ext_if ! -s 8.8.8.8 -j DROP


And it worked:



PORT STATE SERVICE
8888/tcp filtered unknown

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 15.05 seconds


My question is then:



is the solution above right for my case? i mean: acting like above, i am overriding ufw rule allow in from 8.8.8.8 to any port 8888 proto tcp with a docker rule that says "expose ports only if traffic comes from ip 8.8.8.8 " ... is this the right approach?



would not be better to leave ufw do the "bad work" of drop unwanted packets and then just forward traffic from filtered ports to docker? is there a way to do this?



I would avoid this solution because being an iptable rule of the DOCKER chain, that rule involves all the containers i currently have or i will have.



Thank you.







networking iptables nat port-forwarding docker






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jan 31 '16 at 14:42









Tombart

1,16811736




1,16811736










asked Aug 14 '15 at 17:09









sciakysystemsciakysystem

112




112












  • Could you provide output of iptables-save? When Docker starts it modifies iptables rules in order to ensure mapping to ports that should be open.

    – Tombart
    Jan 31 '16 at 11:12

















  • Could you provide output of iptables-save? When Docker starts it modifies iptables rules in order to ensure mapping to ports that should be open.

    – Tombart
    Jan 31 '16 at 11:12
















Could you provide output of iptables-save? When Docker starts it modifies iptables rules in order to ensure mapping to ports that should be open.

– Tombart
Jan 31 '16 at 11:12





Could you provide output of iptables-save? When Docker starts it modifies iptables rules in order to ensure mapping to ports that should be open.

– Tombart
Jan 31 '16 at 11:12










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















0














On Linux, both ufw and docker's rules are implemented on top of netfilter. So is iptables. So it is not possible to get ufw to do some things and get docker rules to do others - all those things will be done by the single underlying netfilter subsystem.



The command iptables-save is useful to dump out everything that has been configured for netfilter, including docker rules and ufw, and then (with some effort) you can follow through the chains and see what it is doing.






share|improve this answer






























    0














    Note that when Docker daemon starts, it adds DOCKER chain to *filter and *nat rules. If you clear all iptables rules afterwards, using e.g. ufw, you might break expected behaviour. When you start a container, a FORWARD rules is added to DOCKER chain. Docker is running command like this:



    iptables --wait -t filter -A DOCKER ! -i docker0 -o docker0 -p tcp -d 172.17.0.2 --dport 8888 -j ACCEPT


    However, this won't open any port to the world, because Docker is not modifying INPUT rules of iptables. So, this means that there's something wrong with your ufw rules.



    If you don't like Docker modifying your iptables rules, you can disable it when in Docker service configuration by adding --iptables=false.






    share|improve this answer























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "2"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f714276%2fbind-docker-container-ports-only-to-specific-outside-server-address%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      0














      On Linux, both ufw and docker's rules are implemented on top of netfilter. So is iptables. So it is not possible to get ufw to do some things and get docker rules to do others - all those things will be done by the single underlying netfilter subsystem.



      The command iptables-save is useful to dump out everything that has been configured for netfilter, including docker rules and ufw, and then (with some effort) you can follow through the chains and see what it is doing.






      share|improve this answer



























        0














        On Linux, both ufw and docker's rules are implemented on top of netfilter. So is iptables. So it is not possible to get ufw to do some things and get docker rules to do others - all those things will be done by the single underlying netfilter subsystem.



        The command iptables-save is useful to dump out everything that has been configured for netfilter, including docker rules and ufw, and then (with some effort) you can follow through the chains and see what it is doing.






        share|improve this answer

























          0












          0








          0







          On Linux, both ufw and docker's rules are implemented on top of netfilter. So is iptables. So it is not possible to get ufw to do some things and get docker rules to do others - all those things will be done by the single underlying netfilter subsystem.



          The command iptables-save is useful to dump out everything that has been configured for netfilter, including docker rules and ufw, and then (with some effort) you can follow through the chains and see what it is doing.






          share|improve this answer













          On Linux, both ufw and docker's rules are implemented on top of netfilter. So is iptables. So it is not possible to get ufw to do some things and get docker rules to do others - all those things will be done by the single underlying netfilter subsystem.



          The command iptables-save is useful to dump out everything that has been configured for netfilter, including docker rules and ufw, and then (with some effort) you can follow through the chains and see what it is doing.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Aug 17 '15 at 13:54









          BryanBryan

          27417




          27417























              0














              Note that when Docker daemon starts, it adds DOCKER chain to *filter and *nat rules. If you clear all iptables rules afterwards, using e.g. ufw, you might break expected behaviour. When you start a container, a FORWARD rules is added to DOCKER chain. Docker is running command like this:



              iptables --wait -t filter -A DOCKER ! -i docker0 -o docker0 -p tcp -d 172.17.0.2 --dport 8888 -j ACCEPT


              However, this won't open any port to the world, because Docker is not modifying INPUT rules of iptables. So, this means that there's something wrong with your ufw rules.



              If you don't like Docker modifying your iptables rules, you can disable it when in Docker service configuration by adding --iptables=false.






              share|improve this answer



























                0














                Note that when Docker daemon starts, it adds DOCKER chain to *filter and *nat rules. If you clear all iptables rules afterwards, using e.g. ufw, you might break expected behaviour. When you start a container, a FORWARD rules is added to DOCKER chain. Docker is running command like this:



                iptables --wait -t filter -A DOCKER ! -i docker0 -o docker0 -p tcp -d 172.17.0.2 --dport 8888 -j ACCEPT


                However, this won't open any port to the world, because Docker is not modifying INPUT rules of iptables. So, this means that there's something wrong with your ufw rules.



                If you don't like Docker modifying your iptables rules, you can disable it when in Docker service configuration by adding --iptables=false.






                share|improve this answer

























                  0












                  0








                  0







                  Note that when Docker daemon starts, it adds DOCKER chain to *filter and *nat rules. If you clear all iptables rules afterwards, using e.g. ufw, you might break expected behaviour. When you start a container, a FORWARD rules is added to DOCKER chain. Docker is running command like this:



                  iptables --wait -t filter -A DOCKER ! -i docker0 -o docker0 -p tcp -d 172.17.0.2 --dport 8888 -j ACCEPT


                  However, this won't open any port to the world, because Docker is not modifying INPUT rules of iptables. So, this means that there's something wrong with your ufw rules.



                  If you don't like Docker modifying your iptables rules, you can disable it when in Docker service configuration by adding --iptables=false.






                  share|improve this answer













                  Note that when Docker daemon starts, it adds DOCKER chain to *filter and *nat rules. If you clear all iptables rules afterwards, using e.g. ufw, you might break expected behaviour. When you start a container, a FORWARD rules is added to DOCKER chain. Docker is running command like this:



                  iptables --wait -t filter -A DOCKER ! -i docker0 -o docker0 -p tcp -d 172.17.0.2 --dport 8888 -j ACCEPT


                  However, this won't open any port to the world, because Docker is not modifying INPUT rules of iptables. So, this means that there's something wrong with your ufw rules.



                  If you don't like Docker modifying your iptables rules, you can disable it when in Docker service configuration by adding --iptables=false.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered Jan 31 '16 at 11:29









                  TombartTombart

                  1,16811736




                  1,16811736



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f714276%2fbind-docker-container-ports-only-to-specific-outside-server-address%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Club Baloncesto Breogán Índice Historia | Pavillón | Nome | O Breogán na cultura popular | Xogadores | Adestradores | Presidentes | Palmarés | Historial | Líderes | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegacióncbbreogan.galCadroGuía oficial da ACB 2009-10, páxina 201Guía oficial ACB 1992, páxina 183. Editorial DB.É de 6.500 espectadores sentados axeitándose á última normativa"Estudiantes Junior, entre as mellores canteiras"o orixinalHemeroteca El Mundo Deportivo, 16 setembro de 1970, páxina 12Historia do BreogánAlfredo Pérez, o último canoneiroHistoria C.B. BreogánHemeroteca de El Mundo DeportivoJimmy Wright, norteamericano do Breogán deixará Lugo por ameazas de morteResultados de Breogán en 1986-87Resultados de Breogán en 1990-91Ficha de Velimir Perasović en acb.comResultados de Breogán en 1994-95Breogán arrasa al Barça. "El Mundo Deportivo", 27 de setembro de 1999, páxina 58CB Breogán - FC BarcelonaA FEB invita a participar nunha nova Liga EuropeaCharlie Bell na prensa estatalMáximos anotadores 2005Tempada 2005-06 : Tódolos Xogadores da Xornada""Non quero pensar nunha man negra, mais pregúntome que está a pasar""o orixinalRaúl López, orgulloso dos xogadores, presume da boa saúde económica do BreogánJulio González confirma que cesa como presidente del BreogánHomenaxe a Lisardo GómezA tempada do rexurdimento celesteEntrevista a Lisardo GómezEl COB dinamita el Pazo para forzar el quinto (69-73)Cafés Candelas, patrocinador del CB Breogán"Suso Lázare, novo presidente do Breogán"o orixinalCafés Candelas Breogán firma el mayor triunfo de la historiaEl Breogán realizará 17 homenajes por su cincuenta aniversario"O Breogán honra ao seu fundador e primeiro presidente"o orixinalMiguel Giao recibiu a homenaxe do PazoHomenaxe aos primeiros gladiadores celestesO home que nos amosa como ver o Breo co corazónTita Franco será homenaxeada polos #50anosdeBreoJulio Vila recibirá unha homenaxe in memoriam polos #50anosdeBreo"O Breogán homenaxeará aos seus aboados máis veteráns"Pechada ovación a «Capi» Sanmartín e Ricardo «Corazón de González»Homenaxe por décadas de informaciónPaco García volve ao Pazo con motivo do 50 aniversario"Resultados y clasificaciones""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, campión da Copa Princesa""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, equipo ACB"C.B. Breogán"Proxecto social"o orixinal"Centros asociados"o orixinalFicha en imdb.comMario Camus trata la recuperación del amor en 'La vieja música', su última película"Páxina web oficial""Club Baloncesto Breogán""C. B. Breogán S.A.D."eehttp://www.fegaba.com

                      Vilaño, A Laracha Índice Patrimonio | Lugares e parroquias | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación43°14′52″N 8°36′03″O / 43.24775, -8.60070

                      Cegueira Índice Epidemioloxía | Deficiencia visual | Tipos de cegueira | Principais causas de cegueira | Tratamento | Técnicas de adaptación e axudas | Vida dos cegos | Primeiros auxilios | Crenzas respecto das persoas cegas | Crenzas das persoas cegas | O neno deficiente visual | Aspectos psicolóxicos da cegueira | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación54.054.154.436928256blindnessDicionario da Real Academia GalegaPortal das Palabras"International Standards: Visual Standards — Aspects and Ranges of Vision Loss with Emphasis on Population Surveys.""Visual impairment and blindness""Presentan un plan para previr a cegueira"o orixinalACCDV Associació Catalana de Cecs i Disminuïts Visuals - PMFTrachoma"Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber's congenital amaurosis"1844137110.1056/NEJMoa0802268Cans guía - os mellores amigos dos cegosArquivadoEscola de cans guía para cegos en Mortágua, PortugalArquivado"Tecnología para ciegos y deficientes visuales. Recopilación de recursos gratuitos en la Red""Colorino""‘COL.diesis’, escuchar los sonidos del color""COL.diesis: Transforming Colour into Melody and Implementing the Result in a Colour Sensor Device"o orixinal"Sistema de desarrollo de sinestesia color-sonido para invidentes utilizando un protocolo de audio""Enseñanza táctil - geometría y color. Juegos didácticos para niños ciegos y videntes""Sistema Constanz"L'ocupació laboral dels cecs a l'Estat espanyol està pràcticament equiparada a la de les persones amb visió, entrevista amb Pedro ZuritaONCE (Organización Nacional de Cegos de España)Prevención da cegueiraDescrición de deficiencias visuais (Disc@pnet)Braillín, un boneco atractivo para calquera neno, con ou sen discapacidade, que permite familiarizarse co sistema de escritura e lectura brailleAxudas Técnicas36838ID00897494007150-90057129528256DOID:1432HP:0000618D001766C10.597.751.941.162C97109C0155020