Subcategories

  • Discussions and feedback related to this forum

    608 Topics
    3k Posts
    johnpozJ
    @Popolou well that is recent for sure.. I don't recall putting that in - maybe?? Fixed now it seems which is the good thing. Thanks for bringing to attention.
  • Community Hiring and For Hire postings related to jobs that require pfSense software skills

    27 Topics
    114 Posts
    w0wW
    @sef1414 Name it "run.sh", copy to pf and chmod according documentation https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/development/boot-commands.html#shell-script-option You will see messages in the system log like those quoted in the script after logger command.
  • Rowhammer

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    1k Views
    P
    @stan-qaz: From the first link: We built two working privilege escalation exploits that use this effect. One exploit uses rowhammer-induced bit flips to gain kernel privileges on x86-64 Linux when run as an unprivileged userland process. When run on a machine vulnerable to the rowhammer problem, the process was able to induce bit flips in page table entries (PTEs). It was able to use this to gain write access to its own page table, and hence gain read-write access to all of physical memory. So it isn't a random flip and hope issue but something that can be targeted at a specific machine. Yeh, that's why I put "random" in quotes. It takes some number of (re)writes to for the bit flips to happen, and it depends on analog charge leakage properties of the memory storage locations. That will vary from location to location, chip to chip, brand to brand… So any attack can be statistically targeted in a way that does make it "possible" to achieve bit flips in something like the bit pattern the attacker is aiming for. The articles I have seen do not give any idea about how well targeted the bit flipping can be in real life - i.e. on a typical real-world system with other user processes doing real stuff, how many times does the attacking code bugcheck the system, compared to achieving exploitable privilege escalation without bugchecking the system.
  • Lenovo pre-installs PCs with HTTPS hijacking adware

    39
    0 Votes
    39 Posts
    6k Views
    K
    To make sheeples see green instead of red….
  • Poetic justice: Can't wait.

    10
    0 Votes
    10 Posts
    1k Views
    ?
    I think this article nails the case. they have my market at #1 checkmated by Verizon. Totally correct as well. http://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-google-fiber-lottery/
  • Recent tweets from the pfSense team

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    715 Views
    No one has replied
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    765 Views
    No one has replied
  • Where can I find the source-code for pfSense's FAIRQ implementation?

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    2k Views
    H
    HFSC is inter-queue and FAIRQ is intra-queue. Another way to put it is HFSC decides which queue goes next and FAIRQ decides which packets leave a queue.
  • PfSense: Unattended installation with Foreman

    27
    0 Votes
    27 Posts
    11k Views
    ?
    https://blog.pfsense.org/?p=1588 Now hook in some BSDploy (http://docs.bsdploy.net/en/latest/)
  • Network cable labeling

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    1k Views
    No one has replied
  • FreeBSD 11

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    4k Views
    ?
    @phil.davis: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT Release Notes: https://www.freebsd.org/relnotes/CURRENT/relnotes/ That is an ongoing set of release notes that are updated as things happen. There is also https://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD11 Looking at, potentially, the most important section of that for the average pfSense usr: Support for linking NIC Receive Side Scaling (RSS) to the network stack's connection-group implementation (r263198) We actually (privately) support this by loaning a set of 10G and 40G cards to the individual doing this work.  It won't have a large impact on pfSense (yet), because it is all being done first to support reception on the box, rather than forwarding through it. Support for the UDP-Lite protocol (RFC 3828) has been added to both IPv4 and IPv6 stacks (r264212) I doubt anyone cares (yet), and this was already in FreeBSD 10.1 (and thus pfSense 2.2) for IPv4. IPX is no longer supported (r263140) Hurray! AppleTalk is no longer supported (r263152) Hurray! Flowid, bindmulti and RSS awareness have been added to the IPv6 stack (r268562) See above where we support this via loaned cards to the developer RSS awareness has been added to the igb(4) driver (r268028) RSS awareness has been added to the ixgbe(4) driver (r268029) These are Intel 1Gbps and 10Gbps cards.  Please see the paper, "Measure Twice, Code Once: Network Performance Analysis for FreeBSD" to be given by George Neville-Neil and myself at AsiaBSDcon in March.  I won't reveal the contents of the paper, but I will reveal that pfSense 2.2 is significantly faster than 11-CURRENT with a NODEBUG kernel. netstat can display RSS and flow information with -R (r266448) See above. PF hash has been changed from Jenkins to Murmur3 which shows a conservative 3% increase in packets per second (r272906) We're the party responsible for making this happen.  (It was George Neville-Neil and I.) and it's already in pfSense 2.2, btw. Netmap support has been added to libpcap allowing tcpdump and other native pcap application to run directly on netmap ports (r272659) this is (just) importing more of Luigi's latest work. faith(4) and faithd( 8 ) have been removed from base (r274331) Hurray! cxgbe(4) will now front loads as much as possible before any driver lock or software queue gets involved (r276485) Chelsio cards.  There was a useless panic removed yesterday as well. @phil.davis: Is there a "roadmap" document somewhere that has a target timetable for 11.0-RELEASE and what is hoped to be in it? It's not that time, yet.    Nor is this the FreeBSD-CURRENT forum. The other major thing that is in pfSense 2.2 that is not yet in FreeBSD are the changes to the IPsec stack to support AES-GCM, enabling AES-NI accelerated IPsec.  Make no mistake, it's going in FreeBSD, it's just that the work isn't done, yet.
  • Intels AES-NI instructions

    25
    0 Votes
    25 Posts
    5k Views
    H
    @reggie14: @Harvy66: The most concerning exploit I can think of is the RNG. Almost any changes to AES-NI will cause the system to stop working and will be easily detectable as storage and network instantly breaks. But changes to RNG does not cause catastrophic failure. Agreed.  To make matters worse, poor RNGs are extremely difficult to detect.  And in crypto protocols there are lots of opportunities for the attacker reconstruct the state of your RNG if it has a major weakness. @Harvy66: Most any back door related to AES-NI will probably require physical access at some point. AES-NI could save the last N keys in non-volatile on-chip storage or at a certain memory location in dram. Storing unexpected data in dram could very likely result in data corruption unless the location was reserved, but the CPU does not reserve memory, it would have to be in concert with another device that is also back-doored. Maybe I'm not following you, but AES-NI doesn't do what you think it does.  As I said in my previous post, AES-NI is just an accelerator.  If you want to steal a key, you certainly don't need physical access.  The keys are just sitting in memory, so you just need to memory-scrape it (or, in some cases, read it from disk). Even if someone wanted to put a backdoor in AES-NI, I'm not even sure what they'd do that wouldn't be better accomplished with some other form of malware. (And those other methods would work perfectly fine against any software crypto library.) @Harvy66: Any hardware based remote backdoor would require several devices to work together to accomplish this feat. Doing this transparently in a way that doesn't cause an OS to crash would be quite hard, since not all OSs work the same and they change over time. Well, that depends on what you mean by a hardware-based backdoor.  Purely hardware?  Sure, that looks needlessly complicated.  But if that includes tampering with low-level firmware, either in the BIOS or in the firmware in any of the numerous devices in your computer with direct memory access, then that doesn't look that hard.  It seems like an awful lot of work to for a highly targeted attack, though. For both the AES-NI and "hardware" backdoors, I was going after is it would be hard to create remote backdoor that was integrated into the hardware and not software. Creating any old remote backdoor wouldn't be hard, but creating an undetectable backdoor that does not crash the system would be quite difficult if it was built directly into the CPU or network silicon. I assume the easiest place would be into the drivers, assuming they're binary blobs.
  • Bandwidth shopping help

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    1k Views
    G
    windstream is my dsl provider don't know if they offer third party isp option
  • Mini Haswell

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    793 Views
    No one has replied
  • R.I.P. m0n0wall

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    2k Views
    stephenw10S
    Yep, sad times. I remember running m0n0wall on an old P100 many years ago. That was my first BSD experience. Steve
  • So, when are we going to have a REAL hangout?

    35
    0 Votes
    35 Posts
    6k Views
    ?
    +1  Land of my peeps… 8)
  • Setting up IP numbers on a network.

    18
    0 Votes
    18 Posts
    4k Views
    P
    Just for fun, there are 2^64 IPv6 addresses in a /64 IPv6 subnet - that is: 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 There are 3,153,600 seconds in a year. Let's say your nmap can scan 1,000,000 (1 million) addresses per second, just to be ambitious. So it will take 18,446,744,073,709 seconds, which is 5,849,424 years. Hmmm - I don't think I want to wait that long just to find the IPv6 address of my lost device.
  • PfSense Gold membership will offer meetups??

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    1k Views
    jimpJ
    ha! Many of us are already married. We always accept a free $beverage though.  :D The Gold Member "meetups" are the monthly Hangouts we have that are generally like a mini training session or us showing off a particular feature or methodology. Eventually we'll run out of topics though! We want to have some of them be Q&A sessions as well but the fear is that people will treat them as "fix my firewall" sessions and not a Q&A to benefit everyone. It may work if we have everyone submit some brief questions beforehand so we can have plenty of choices and time to research.
  • PFSense reboot intermittently

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    1k Views
    Y
    Every other VM's are running absolutely fine apart from the pfsense. The Install is clean and version is 2.2 Actual System build is 2.2-RELEASE (amd64) built on Thu Jan 22 14:03:54 CST 2015 FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p4 BTW it reboots again. :'(
  • Pfsense v2 book print?

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    1k Views
    KOMK
    Most of the conce[ts still apply.  There will be be GUI changes and some other stuff like Unbound but I would think 85% is the same.
  • Stephenw10 got hit by lightning and is now 1337

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    1k Views
    M
    If one deserves it, it is you  ;D ;D ;D (congrats with even more work  :P ;D 8) ) [image: congrats.png] [image: congrats.png_thumb]
  • I just saw this on G+

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    1k Views
    marcellocM
    May take longer then 2.3… ::)
Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.