Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    3.1.0_6 UPDATE

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved pfBlockerNG
    77 Posts 14 Posters 16.3k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • ?
      A Former User @jdeloach
      last edited by

      @jdeloach said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

      I don't see any issues listed in any of the messages, that
      I have ever had.

      This is also not a must be for everybody I would be glad about to see the same here, but I am also using very old
      hardware and perhaps to "small foot print" for this load.
      PC Engines APU4D4

      Granted I don't use Netgate hardware and only run
      CE 2.6.0.

      It is an software problem so it should be nothing to do
      with the hardware it selfs, but with much packages installed and much of list feeds, snort rules and av signatures it is perhaps here and there able to point on.

      Swap space is always 0% and CPU usage is never
      spikes above about 3%.

      Only my AV signatures are taking 1 GB - 1,7 GB of ram and I only own 4 GB hard soldered on the board! So 4 GB swap is not such a great thing if you have to deal with a bunch of rules and lists.

      By the way I'm running Snort as well as pfBlockerNG.

      Me too, but it comes squid & squidguard plus clamav on top of it and with some lists I haven´t seen such numbers
      before like you. And WiFi and FreeRadius are not activated
      at this time. I really think it should be in the near future another box more strong or powerful.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • keyserK
        keyser Rebel Alliance @jdeloach
        last edited by

        @jdeloach said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

        I don't see any issues listed in any of the messages, that I have ever had. Granted I don't use Netgate hardware and only run CE 2.6.0. Swap space is always 0% and CPU usage is never spikes above about 3%.

        By the way I'm running Snort as well as pfBlockerNG.

        As I understand the issue, it’s related to a change in the logging format pfsense uses in pfSense+ 22.05
        That release is as far as I remember a pfsense+ release only - there where no CE 2.6.1 or whatever that could have been called.
        I might remember wrong, but CE2.6 came with pfsense+ 22.01

        Love the no fuss of using the official appliances :-)

        ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • ?
          A Former User @keyser
          last edited by

          @keyser said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

          I might remember wrong, but CE2.6 came with pfsense+ 22.01

          CE branch (CE tree)
          pfSense CE 2.5 > 2.6 > 2.7.....
          Plus branch (Plus tree)
          pfSense+ (Plus) 22.01 > 22.05 > 22.09 > 22.11....
          Developer branch (devel tree)
          pfSense x.y devel is even a developer version for testing out
          using at home and/or in some rarely cases, only.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • lohphatL
            lohphat @BBcan177
            last edited by

            @bbcan177 Yay! Just upped my Patreon contribution.

            SG-3100 24.11-RELEASE (arm) | Avahi (2.2_6) | ntopng (5.6.0_1) | openvpn-client-export (1.9.5) | pfBlockerNG-devel (3.2.1_20) | System_Patches (2.2.20_1)

            DefenderLLCD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
            • DefenderLLCD
              DefenderLLC @lohphat
              last edited by DefenderLLC

              @lohphat said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

              @bbcan177 Yay! Just upped my Patreon contribution.

              For those that need to donate to the cause (myself included):

              https://www.patreon.com/pfBlockerNG

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 5
              • lohphatL
                lohphat
                last edited by

                I upgraded from _4 to _6, had to manually restart unbound (as usual), and had to reapply the pre-existing patch in /net/usr/local/pkg/pfblockerng/pfblockerng.inc

                ...
                -                $r = explode(')', $result, 2);
                +                $r = explode(' ', $result, 2);
                ...
                

                Watching the git commits, there was activity in the pfblockerng.inc file but not the above change.

                Is there a Redmine bug tracking that?

                SG-3100 24.11-RELEASE (arm) | Avahi (2.2_6) | ntopng (5.6.0_1) | openvpn-client-export (1.9.5) | pfBlockerNG-devel (3.2.1_20) | System_Patches (2.2.20_1)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  SteveITS Galactic Empire @SteveITS
                  last edited by

                  @lohphat said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

                  Is there a Redmine bug tracking that?

                  yes

                  @steveits said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

                  https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/13154

                  The code changes didn't find their way into _5 or _6.

                  Pre-2.7.2/23.09: Only install packages for your version, or risk breaking it. Select your branch in System/Update/Update Settings.
                  When upgrading, allow 10-15 minutes to restart, or more depending on packages and device speed.
                  Upvote 👍 helpful posts!

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • DefenderLLCD
                    DefenderLLC
                    last edited by

                    FYI, 3.1.0_7 is out now with the included fix... Just installed it on my 6100 and everything is working fine.

                    lohphatL 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • lohphatL
                      lohphat @DefenderLLC
                      last edited by

                      @cloudified Same here. As usual, had to manually restart unbound

                      SG-3100 24.11-RELEASE (arm) | Avahi (2.2_6) | ntopng (5.6.0_1) | openvpn-client-export (1.9.5) | pfBlockerNG-devel (3.2.1_20) | System_Patches (2.2.20_1)

                      DefenderLLCD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • DefenderLLCD
                        DefenderLLC @lohphat
                        last edited by

                        @lohphat said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

                        @cloudified Same here. As usual, had to manually restart unbound

                        Same here. This is only my 2nd time upgrading pfBlocker and I guess that's expected behavior.

                        S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • J
                          JMV43 0 @BBcan177
                          last edited by

                          @bbcan177 Is 3.1.0_7 out for +22.05?

                          DefenderLLCD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • DefenderLLCD
                            DefenderLLC @JMV43 0
                            last edited by DefenderLLC

                            @jmv43-0 It is, which is why I just posted that. I noticed it as an available upgrade in Package Manager on my 6100 running 22.05+. Plus he already said it would be coming out this week.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • ?
                              A Former User
                              last edited by

                              pfBlocker-NG 3.1.0_7 and acme 0.7.3 as today they are available for 22.05 I updated in time and all is fine since
                              the update. Look at the numbers now;

                              6.jpg

                              8.jpg

                              7.jpg

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                SteveITS Galactic Empire @DefenderLLC
                                last edited by

                                @cloudified said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

                                I guess that's expected behavior

                                More or less...I seem to recall a post from BBCan177 a while back, saying it was a bug in pfSense's package system, so he can't fix it.

                                Pre-2.7.2/23.09: Only install packages for your version, or risk breaking it. Select your branch in System/Update/Update Settings.
                                When upgrading, allow 10-15 minutes to restart, or more depending on packages and device speed.
                                Upvote 👍 helpful posts!

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • T
                                  turker
                                  last edited by

                                  3.1.0_7. everything is fine, but Old rules are not deleted on widget
                                  errors.jpg

                                  DefenderLLCD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • DefenderLLCD
                                    DefenderLLC @turker
                                    last edited by

                                    @turker said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

                                    3.1.0_7. everything is fine, but Old rules are not deleted on widget
                                    errors.jpg

                                    @turker Do a force reload and restart the pfBlocker services.

                                    T J 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                    • T
                                      turker @DefenderLLC
                                      last edited by

                                      @cloudified
                                      i do Force reload pfBlocker services and restarted, pfsense restarted. Nothing changed.

                                      DefenderLLCD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • DefenderLLCD
                                        DefenderLLC @turker
                                        last edited by

                                        @turker are you getting any table memory errors? That might indicate that you need to increase your Firewall Maximum Table Entries in the System / Advanced / Firewall & NAT section. I had to increase mine from 400,000 to 1,000,000 to account for all of the pfBlocker lists I have configured.

                                        J T 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                        • J
                                          jdeloach @DefenderLLC
                                          last edited by jdeloach

                                          @cloudified
                                          @turker

                                          Did you manually create firewall rules for those aliases or did it create them automatically? Check your firewall rules and see if those aliases still appear in your firewall rules, if they do, delete those firewall rules.

                                          I've seen cases where I created rules with aliases in pfBlocker but didn't delete them and they would still show up in that table, like you are showing.

                                          DefenderLLCD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • DefenderLLCD
                                            DefenderLLC @jdeloach
                                            last edited by

                                            @jdeloach said in 3.1.0_6 UPDATE:

                                            @cloudified

                                            Did you manually create firewall rules for those aliases or did it create them automatically? Check your firewall rules and see if those aliases still appear in your firewall rules, if they do, delete those firewall rules.

                                            I've seen cases where I created rules with aliases in pfBlocker but didn't delete them and they would still show up in that table, like you are showing.

                                            I think you meant to reply to @turker.

                                            J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.