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

    PfSense 3.0 Inquiry to Gonzo : will rsyslogd replace syslogd?

    Off-Topic & Non-Support Discussion
    3
    3
    1.1k
    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.
    • chaseC
      chase
      last edited by

      Will rsyslogd replace syslogd in pfSense 3.0?  I currently need a two-way TLS secure channel to export detailed pfSense firewall events to cloud-based analytics in a single Netgate SOHO appliance, as opposed to current strategies of deploying a second box on premise to host a rsyslogd collector and therein do the secure TLS channel there up to the analytics cloud.

      No question there are GUI challenges for the multi-step complication of rsyslogd, in terms of configuring certificates, cipher selection, fallbacks, etc – all of which is not as turnkey easy as the present pfSense GUI syslogd entry of IP:PORT -- I get that.  On the other hand, I don't want a site's firewall events to be locked into a single "cloud" analytics for the ease of configuring the setup of rsyslogd.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • K
        KimmoJ
        last edited by

        It's ridiculous that the old shitlog (I mean, syslog) daemon is still in this thing.

        The built in POS doesn't even allow you to use TCP, and the messages don't contain the system name, so when you pipe it into a log management system you have yet another issue. There are drop-in replacements that are lightyears ahead, so why this old 1980's esque trash?

        It should be replaced in 2.4, not 3. Ideally, 2.0 but it's harder to go back in time.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • jimpJ
          jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
          last edited by

          Convince FreeBSD to include a different syslog distribution in the base system, then we'll talk. We use what they use. :-)

          You can use the syslog-ng package if you want so you are not limited to what's in the base system.

          It's too late for such a change in 2.4, maybe 2.5, not sure what will be in that role for 3.0 but it's still early there.

          We've already been talking about dropping clog in favor of sensible log rotation and retention since space constraints are not what they used to be in the past, even with RAM disks since most systems have more RAM available. Once we remove the clog-style log requirement then it frees up a lot of options like using syslog-ng in base.

          Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

          Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

          Do not Chat/PM for help!

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • First post
            Last post
          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.