@luke240778:

Is there a way that an admin can setup so that pfsense sends an email to a certain address whenever a certain user makes any changes?  For example, when user "a" adds a name to Captive Portal MAC passthrough list, that i get an email?

Also, setting up the email notifications.. cant seem to do it with my email which is hosted by 1and1.com  has anyone else had any luck ?

Is there any way to have pfSense send me an SMS text, or email when a user logs in to OpenVPN?  This would be very helpful for me.

^ exactly – it is possible for your machine to have a locally cached record for what your doing that got cached from elsewhere.

Really need to understand how your resolve, and what what your actually wanting to resolve to make sure your resolving the fqdn your wanting to use correctly.

a simple ping should show you what the box resolves your fqdn too, which should be the exact same thing your ssh client resolves.

as mentioned before using actual resolvable stuff as example is bad.  And again I would stress if running your own local zones - I would use something that can never be resolved on the public for your tld, like .local or .lan or .localdomain -- when you use actual tlds that can be resolved public you might be having an issue where its being resolve using public dns vs locally if you don't have something setup correctly on your local nameserver.

Thanks for the explanations. All clear now  :).

@chpalmer:

Id see if you can find a firmware update for your modem.

Is it possible your running pppoa on the modem but pppoe on your pfsense box when the modem is bridged?

Thanks for that and I had checked that possibility.  With different modems, it still dropped.  Remove the Realtek cards,,,,,,no more drops.

I appreciate you taking the time to reply…........

It has nothing to do with what they're using for DNS, you have to configure your firewall rules to only permit traffic to the proxy and other traffic you need to allow directly out, and not allow HTTP or HTTPS directly out.

Yep, figured after research.

Fixed.

Distinguishing a legit RDP user vs. a brute force attacker is impossible to do accurately at the network level. Nothing at the network level has that kind of visibility into RDP. Limiting the number of simultaneous connections per IP is the best you can do. That type of scenario has to be detected by the server, or something monitoring the server. To react to it, something on the server or monitoring the server could be scripted to block the IP on the firewall.

Not on a 32 bit piece of hardware.

Big Thanks to MIQ in the IRC channel!!

here is how to do it for any future searches:

Pf sense >firewall>virtual IPs
add a new rule:
type ip alias,
wan interface
type network
(IP address/subnet mask)
save and apply

Pf Sense >firewall>nat
outbound tab, save in manual mode then add a new rule:
leave do not nat unchecked.
interface wan
select protocols
source (your internal server)
destination any
translation choose your alias
save and apply.

move rule up or down in the outbound mappings.

If all goes well then that box should go out on the IP specified in your alias

good luck

Thanks a lot :-)

@johnpoz:

"Modem is connected directly on pfSense WAN card"

Depends if what your calling a "modem" is really a modem and not a gateway.  What is your pfsense wan IP, does it start with 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x or 172.16-31.x.x ?

"I have now tracked the problem down to the squid proxy"

thought you said they could make it work for you since they changed something?

Modem is the real cable modem. IP of wan is 81.x.x.x

If you watch the tests in the first post, you see the tunneling of rtmp isn't blocked. I guess they didn't use tunneling in the past, turned it on for a moment (the moment it worked for me) and now turned it back off.

From what i've read flash ignores proxy settings and tries to use port 1935, 80 or 443 and if this doesn't work alot of website will try to send the data in a capsulated http packet. They don't use that method for some reason. I've tried to add port 1935 to the squid savelist but that didn't fix it.

I'll try moving ALL the load balancing to an external IP address using IP Alias and see if that makes any difference.

[edit]

Ok, that works. TCP Load Balancing worked fine using external IP addresses on the DMZ interface
DNS load balancing ONLY works if ALL load balancing (including the TCP) uses IP Aliases.

I will dig into this further and see if I can suss out exactly whats going on.

Thanks all!

Why not just assign a WAN interface and then attach nothing to it? Are you running into restrictions because of the number of interfaces you have? I have a few situations similar to what you describe and I simply assign a WAN to DHCP and then just connect nothing to the assigned WAN interface.

I have seen dozens of those Kingston SSDs fail in the wild for customers (Thankfully I haven't used any myself). Wouldn't shock me if the drive was dying.

The @'s in the log after a reboot are normal - they aren't log files, they're clog files - binary circular logs. The logs are cleared on reboot. On 2.1 and 2.0.2 they aren't cleared anymore.

Typically if it's a crash from a driver or OS issue it will take a crash dump and when you login to the GUI it will offer to submit the crash data to use. The kind of failure you describe sounds more like a hardware failure, but it's still kind of hard to say.

There isn't a way to adjust its interface binding, but you can certainly block it with firewall rules and access it via ssh port forwarding if you like.

Ouh… thatz hell of a task :)
anyways thx fr ur suggestions :)

Thank you for your reply.
i definitely need to assign a public IP on my server. NAT is not working on the internet service i need (according to the internet service support team).
I have tried to bridge WAN - OPT and after that, two more interfaces appear on Interfaces - Assign. The BRIDGE0 and an opt which has the same mac address with my WAN. Should i do something with them?
If you thing that this is not a good implementation, i can use pfsense in bridge mode only and route internet traffic of my lan to another connection.

Thanks again

Well we are trying to figure out the problem. Let us eliminate RIP and set a perm route to make sure.

@stephenw10:

pfSense uses pf(4) not ipfw. Though it does use ipfw for the captive portal function.
I think you may out of luck translating that from iptables.  :-\

Steve

If you don't mind setting up the rules manually, you can activate the portal and then create your own ipfw rules. The only trick is to make the last step in your rules skip over the portal rules (assuming you don't want captive portal functionality).