@stephenw10 Yeah, I saw that release post and that was the reason I tested the old download link

Might be time to unpin this post, and shorten the list of pinned posts at the top of this important forum section?

@pfGeorge So what? What should I do or not do? Update something somewhere or just wait?

said in Now Available: pfSense Plus 25.07.1-RELEASE: Coincidence? Yes, indeed.

Thanks for working on it.

@yellowRain said in pfSense Plus 25.07 Beta Now Available: Here are some tips and ideas on ipv6. You would have to start with the start : your ISP. The bad news : IPv6 isn't IPv4. After decades, for IPv4, the DHCPv4 WAN IP attribution won. Some ISPs still persist offering a PPPOE connection. What left - 1 % or so, is "totally not standard", so you have to use the ISP box, and connect pfSense as a 'LAN device' using DHCPv4 on the WAN, and you done. For IPv6 : if your ISP was respecting all IPv6 RFCs, then 'set WAN to use DHCPv6-client, and done. Maybe some ISP give you a page with IPv6 setting, but I guess that's pretty rare. Some ISP propose the awkward "Negociate IPv6 over IPv4" or some other strange method. So, normally - afaik, already this : setting a custom static ipv6 address for pfsense router is already quiet 'non standard'. The ISP or ISP box should give : An IPv6 WAN address for the pfSense WAN interface and as many 'prefixes' (/64 networks) for every pfSense LAN your pfSense has. Typically, your ISP or ISP has 256 (/56) indicate with of these prefixes for you (probably minus on, as from the first prefix, only one IPv6 is used, the one for your pfSense WAN). But, as the bad news tells us : every ISP on planet earth has probably broken something (uses their own non RFC method). I'm not staying your 'static' method isn't good, Just that it is - again afaik - not standard. Btw : SLAAC : things can be done differently, I guess, I just never used it.

@stephenw10 Can't we just have a full install ISO again? It seems there are too many use cases where that is either the best, or only way, for us to install instead of the 'netinstaller'.

@chudak said in pfSense Plus 25.03-BETA is here!: Why is 25.0x taking so long this time? Because it is a really good update. ️

@Sergei_Shablovsky said in pfSense CE 2.8 Release Candidate is Here!: So, as a solution You propose me just…to stop using ntopng ? Seriously ? If the unexposed redis vulnerabilities concern you, then yes, I definitely suggest that you stop using ntopng. There are likely much worse vulnerabilities, known and unknown, in ntopng itself. Running any add-on package increases risk, and ntopng is a large and complicated piece of code which brings a higher level of risk than most. Of course, you have to decide for yourself what level of risk you are willing to operate with. FWIW, as a whole I recommend use of ntopng as a diagnostic tool only. I do not recommend it as something for continual, routine operation. @Sergei_Shablovsky said in pfSense CE 2.8 Release Candidate is Here!: I clearly understand that most of this CVEs are out of Netgate’s obligation. But is this mean the current 2.8.0 would be in BETA until all of this CVEs would be resolved by developer’s community ? No. It is not practical to stop the release of pfSense because there is a vulnerability in an add-on provided by the community. pfSense itself would never release. If you want to go down that path, a much more practical approach would be for Netgate to remove the add-on from the repository until all vulnerabilities in the component and all of its dependencies were remediated. Ouch.

I updated to pfSense 2.8.0 RC the other day and noticed when I went through the settings that the time stamp in the ACB Service (Services/Auto Configuration Backup/Restore) is behind my time by 7 hours. I check my time and it is correct for time and zone in the Dashboard. I changed the time zone temporarily but the time stamp did not change in ACB but the zone did, i.e. it was +0200 for CEST and when I changed it to ETC/UTC time zone it went to +0000 but time itself did not change. This is the issue I have on 2 pfsense setups I have running at home. I did some researching and only found this reference to the issue. So, am I doing something wrong in my setups or is this a know issue for pfSense 2.8.0 RC?

@pfGeorge 24.03 is listed as still being a supported version (https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/releases/versions.html) , but the published fixes are listed as only being for 24.11 and 2.7.2. Does that mean 24.03 doesn't have this vulnerability or is 24.03 no longer supported, or patches for 24.03 are coming out later?