23.09.rc Displaying 'later version than official' flag

RobbieTT

@NRgia said in 23.09.rc Displaying 'later version than official' flag:

@RobbieTT Better yet, should any of us be allowed to update to pfSense+ 23.09 from 23.05.1 ?

I don't want to join the pitchfork movement just yet and I remain on the optimistic* side of this apparent debacle; especially as I am only running this second (non-Netgate) machine so that I can do kernel and other invasive tests as requested by Netgate devs.

In the short-term though I could do with knowing where I stand with firmware loads as this last-minute change to the business model has happened in the middle of 23.09 beta / rc updates and I am unsure what happens next.

️

(* I would be surprised if Netgate asked me to repartition my drive, run kernel dumps etc and for them to bill me $399.00 for doing so.)

NRgia

@RobbieTT It's not about the pitchforks, I'm also using pfsense+ on a whitebox. I think it's a great thing that you test and help the devs, but aren't you interested if you can use it still? That's all

jrey

@RobbieTT said in 23.09.rc Displaying 'later version than official' flag:

change to the business model has happened i

Technically challenges aside - to what business model change do you refer?

RobbieTT

@NRgia and @jrey
For sure I am interested, even though I own a Netgate 6100 and the pfSense+ licence that comes with it, it looks like it may (will?) negatively impact my ability to run a secondary machine.

I'm just trying to stay out of it all for the moment. I will acknowledge that this has been a comms disaster for Netgate. They have reversed a position that they encouraged as recently as 2 weeks ago and have left their website and marketing in a confusing mess of conflicting statements and bad links. Nobody in business would intend to implement a change this - Netgate have stumbled out of the bar and pulled a gun - some of this has to be in error or badly mistimed.

He is crazy enough to do it.png

Being 'crazy enough to do it' only works in the movies. I think Netgate needs some time to sort this all out - the recent blog post does not cut it.

️

stephenw10

The changes to the H+L sub availability are completely unrelated to the fact that some people saw an RC as available when they shouldn't have, yet.

When the RC is ready it will show up for everyone currently running 23.09-Beta. Currently that is held by the upstream OpenSSL fix which should be available very shortly.

Steve

jrey

@RobbieTT

Understood, I had not read the recent blog post to which you refer,

It won't impact me. I'm licensed. It will certainly impact a lot of "home" users and impact (likely in a negative fashion) and Netgate's ability to solicit and maintain the support of the open source concept.

The device and software (packages) on it are good, but not that good, that if push comes to shove, I wouldn't just unplug the device and move to something else.

I could give specific examples of packages that get installed, and likely on a lot of devices, that are simply full of security holes and/or out and out are subject to potential failures that can lead to security issues (that's open source). That's the risk and the game.

Netgate will likely come to a fork in the road where they have to decide (stay open or closed) good and bad in each of those, both them and users.

disclaimer, I have no vested interest in Negate. Could continue to "run" with or without their device and/or software. They will obviously proceed in a direction they feel best for their model. And users will ultimately do the same.
I've already crossed the bridge regarding the use of Netgate in certain situations, because of those potential failures and in those cases we use just use different products.

Anyway this is somewhat off topic of the 23.09rc etc that debacle likely won't stop either way. It has been outstanding and consistent since at least 22.05 where every new update brings a "list" debacle.

RobbieTT

@stephenw10

Steve - TVM.

️

jrey

@RobbieTT

and so it begins

https://forum.netgate.com/topic/183637/loved-past-tense-pfsense/5

(sorry my last off topic post on this thread)

jrey

@stephenw10 said in 23.09.rc Displaying 'later version than official' flag:

upstream OpenSSL fix which should be available very shortly.

can we revisit or can you define the term "shortly" ?

stephenw10

The fix is in. Baring something unforeseen expect the RC later today.

jrey

@stephenw10

I guess we must be in the area of "something unforeseen"

Screen Shot 2023-10-27 at 6.08.04 AM.png

Screen Shot 2023-10-27 at 6.10.19 AM.png

In other news, the blinky light stopped (not last night, but the night before) so yesterday's yesterday. Maybe tomorrow's yesterday will be the RC day. We can only guess.

Is what it is.

stephenw10

@jrey said in 23.09.rc Displaying 'later version than official' flag:

I guess we must be in the area of "something unforeseen"

Yup there was an issue with OpenSSL. That's now fixed and we are testing internally. Should be public 'shortly'.

jrey

@stephenw10

Thanks again for checking and the update. Can't resist poking some fun at you here.

previously you said it was OpenSSL and would be "Very Shortly"
now it is still OpenSSL and "Shortly"

so for future reference I'll now understand "Very Shortly" is longer than "Shortly"

also sounds like someone didn't read the warning
https://forum.netgate.com/topic/182213/heads-up-openssl-3-0-x-deprecates-a-lot-of-old-weak-algorithms-and-may-require-manual-changes

I'll go play with a domain controller that went belly up -- that sounds like fun coffee filled morning, and then check again shortly. Cheers

stephenw10

Ha, yup. It's the patch for the recent CVE that failed to apply as expected. But we have a good build and are testing it now. So far no issues. I really think it will be 'shortly'