Yes you can see URLs in https (and http) traffic using Splice mode which is also explained in that hangout. https://youtu.be/xm_wEezrWf4?t=935 Steve

Thanks a bunch, that was exactly what i was missing. Now that you mention it, i feel stupid for having overlooked it. I should have checked the routing table first i guess, then it should have been obvious. Again, thank you very much.

@lost89577 said in Snort: MD5 Hash - Rules Updates - Insecure?: i know this is a long dead topic, but to validate the concern raised. A man in the middle attack was used against my firewall to supply blank sort rules which validated as latest version in snort. The attacker stopped some time after i side loaded the real rule set. i believe it was my ISP proxy that was compromised and no i don't believe i was the real target but all of the ISP users. If you have to get to the web through your ISP's proxy, then your security is hosed from the get-go. The Snort rules URL is an SSL-secured site, so without the proxy you can be reasonably certain you are getting to the correct site based on the SSL session setup the CURL code stem uses within the Snort GUI. With the proxy, and you trusting the proxy's certificate, then you are wide open to your ISP and then to anything or anyone that compromises your ISP. If your ISP won't let you bypass their proxy, then I would be trying to find me another ISP!

Thanks for confirming @stephenw10 . I will transition the server from the LAN to VLAN and leave the LAN unconnected.

Sorry, muscle memory doesn't allow me to type Negate. I'd still be interested to know if you have that rule present. I would assume with a now valid queue. Steve

Glad it's working! Just a note for down the road, eventually you will want to remediate your double NAT situation. In other words, have the ISP configure their modem in bridge mode, so PFsense gets a public IP.

Ok was definitely not the device upgrade, that didn’t happen till the 29th..

@stephenw10 Thank you very much for help and advice! Problem solved.

Unless you have disabled it pfSense will be NATing traffic for 192.168.1.1 to it's WAN IP, 10.65.1.2. Since we know the other side can ping that IP we know it has a route back, hence traffic from the pfSense LAN gets a response. But we don't know the remote side has a route to 10.65.10.X or 10.65.15.X. Nor do we know the MPLS infrastructure knows about those subnets. It looks like a missing route somewhere to me. Once you have that route in place you probably want to disable outbound NAT for 192.168.1.1 so devices at the remote site can see the correct source IP. That makes troubleshooting far easier for one thing. Steve

Install it and have a play it’s not hard to do. Also check out the pfSense videos, @BBcan177 goes over setting up pfblockerng. https://www.netgate.com/resources/videos/pfblockerng-on-pfsense.html

Yes, you will need to use the IGMP proxy to make this work and it will need to be at both ends since there are three subnet involved here. The only other thing you could do use an OpenVPN TAP connection but that would likely require significant network change and introduce other issues. Do you have to use that 'app'? It seems not well suited to your situation. Steve

Mmm, in fact it may not be required as it's a PPP link. I was thrown by your mentioning of DHCP. With a point to point link the traffic should reach the gateway even outside it's subnet. You may just need to set a different monitoring IP. The gateway might not respond to ping. Edit the PPP gateway in System > Routing > Gateways tab. Set, for example, 8.8.8.8 as the 'Monitor IP'. Steve

You should upgrade to 2.4.4p2 when you can. Try swapping the WAN and LAN NICs so that WAN is using the on-board real NIC. See if the failure moves to LAN. Ultimately there are no recommended USB NICs. If you're lucky you might find one that runs reliably. If you do find the LAN now fails after swapping them consider using VLANs and a managed switch instead. Steve

The difficulty with setting something like that up is that the wifi config in pfSense is not intended to connect to dynamically like that. There is no easy way to have it scan for wifi networks and present you with a choice to connect to. Or as you say to work past a captive portal. Though that could be done from a client the first time it connected as long as it wasn't being routed through a VPN that could not connect at that point! It's probably not practical currently IMO. Steve

It is possible to do that in order to use a public subnet directly: https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/book/bridging/index.html However it's far from ideal. It would be much better to have your provider route that subnet to you via a different IP that you can use on WAN. Then you can use the entire subnet on LAN and properly route between them. Steve

You don't have Google DNS defined anywhere there so that client may be using it directly. You should add a firewall rule above the VPN gateway rule to allow client to reach the pfSense LAN IP on port 53 to access Unbound. The OpenVPN server can be configured to hand a DNS server to the clients. It should probably be the local tunnel IP so that they use Unbound. Steve

This is the job of your webserver, not firewall/pfSense. -Rico

A harder way would have been to export your current config, edit out the traffic shaper details, reset your instance back to factory defaults and then imported the edited config. Glad you got it going again.

You can enable logging on the firewall rule that passes traffic for that. If it's passed by a catch-all rule you can add a more specific pass rule above that to catch only that. Steve