Snort package on 64 doesn't work
-
I am running 2.0rc3 64bit
i'll have to start a vm for 2.0rc3… I tried 2.1 Dev last weekend and it worked for me
-
I am running 2.0rc3 64bit
i'll have to start a vm for 2.0rc3… I tried 2.1 Dev last weekend and it worked for me
Running 2.0-RC3 (amd64) built on Sat Aug 6 23:18:46 EDT 2011. Checked "Send alerts to main System logs". I'm getting alerts within the Alerts tab as well as the main system logs.
-
@Ibor:
I am running 2.0rc3 64bit
i'll have to start a vm for 2.0rc3… I tried 2.1 Dev last weekend and it worked for me
Running 2.0-RC3 (amd64) built on Sat Aug 6 23:18:46 EDT 2011. Checked "Send alerts to main System logs". I'm getting alerts within the Alerts tab as well as the main system logs.
So it is working on 2.0RC3..Good to know
-
Can a couple of more folks confirm Snort works on latest amd64 2.0 RC3 snapshots? I tried it on earlier this week and it was not working. Had done clean installs a few times but was never successful to get Snort running. Now on 32-bit 2.0 RC3 as Snort is kinda broken even on 1.2.3 with Snort.org rules not updating. Not a happy camper !!
-
Can a couple of more folks confirm Snort works on latest amd64 2.0 RC3 snapshots? I tried it on earlier this week and it was not working. Had done clean installs a few times but was never successful to get Snort running. Now on 32-bit 2.0 RC3 as Snort is kinda broken even on 1.2.3 with Snort.org rules not updating. Not a happy camper !!
Its works on 2.0RC3 i386… 2 bugs that I know of, Barnyard2 and you can't clear the alerts but you can clear the block list... There are post for a workaround on barnyard2
-
amd64?
-
@Ibor:
I am running 2.0rc3 64bit
i'll have to start a vm for 2.0rc3… I tried 2.1 Dev last weekend and it worked for me
Running 2.0-RC3 (amd64) built on Sat Aug 6 23:18:46 EDT 2011. Checked "Send alerts to main System logs". I'm getting alerts within the Alerts tab as well as the main system logs.
So it is working on 2.0RC3..Good to know
BUT only after entering/executing the following code!! Without it, Snort will not work!
ln -s /usr/lib/libpcap.so /usr/lib/libpcap.so.1 -
@Ibor:
@Ibor:
I am running 2.0rc3 64bit
i'll have to start a vm for 2.0rc3… I tried 2.1 Dev last weekend and it worked for me
Running 2.0-RC3 (amd64) built on Sat Aug 6 23:18:46 EDT 2011. Checked "Send alerts to main System logs". I'm getting alerts within the Alerts tab as well as the main system logs.
So it is working on 2.0RC3..Good to know
BUT only after entering/executing the following code!! Without it, Snort will not work!
ln -s /usr/lib/libpcap.so /usr/lib/libpcap.so.1I wonder if its because of all the packages i have install, maybe one of them ran that command for me…
-
So basically snort on amd64 is still broken.
-
So basically snort on amd64 is still broken.
well if it runs after running a command or two, it wouldn't be broken then! Any why not just run i386? Unless your pumping heavy traffic thru the box and need a lot of memory, I see no benefit running AMD64.
I hate to say this but if your so bent out of shape for snort, then go install another fw distro and deal with their bloatware instead of whining on every snort thread that its not working. There are tickets opened on the issue and the dev's will get to them when they can. You can always donate money to help push it along if you like.
-
Big props to the "C" man on this. For the first time since starting to experiment with replacing our Draytek boxes/smartmonitor with pfsense, I have a working SNORT (2.8.6.1 pkg v. 2.0) interface.
Running the command from an SSH shell worked:```
ln -s /usr/lib/libpcap.so /usr/lib/libpcap.so.1I'm on a fresh install of 2.0-RC3 (amd64) built on Fri Aug 12 14:47:46 EDT 2011\. With SNORT running on both WAN interfaces and a pile of rules selectd, The Atom 330@1.6GHz is showing 15 to 20% usage, and the 2GB of RAM is 72% utilized So the next step is to get it working so that having "Block Offenders" enabled works. Right now, the service will not start with that box checked…which in my rookie understanding of SNORT means it's not really doing anything for me yet. I have two WAN connections, RE1 (DHCP) and RE2 (PPPOE), so would be happy to provide error logs. With "Block Offenders" checked, the system log returns: snort[37235]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_32334_re1/snort.conf(351) Unknown output plugin: "alert_pf" -
Does "Block Offenders" in snort with with pfsense i386?
-
Does "Block Offenders" in snort with with pfsense i386?
it works on i386, just not on amd64
-
So basically snort on amd64 is still broken.
well if it runs after running a command or two, it wouldn't be broken then! Any why not just run i386? Unless your pumping heavy traffic thru the box and need a lot of memory, I see no benefit running AMD64.
I have i386 on one of the boxes. For the box I want Snort on.. i386 is of no use as it can detect about 3.5GB. It made sense earlier when I started with 2GB RAM. I have 4GB RAM now and will be bumping it to 8GB this week. Traffic is extremely heavy, non-stop 24/7.. serving over 30 users on 4 different VLANs. Current bandwidth is 30/4. Will be switching to FTTH 50/25 (or more) soon.
-
Is the code for the 64 bit build available somewhere? I've got a few quiet days this week and would like to see if I can sort the "block offenders" problem on that package.
-
With "Block Offenders" checked, the system log returns: snort[37235]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_32334_re1/snort.conf(351) Unknown output plugin: "alert_pf"
Seeing this error myself on amd64 with "block offenders" checked.
snort[22035]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_44446_re1/snort.conf(343) Unknown output plugin: "alert_pf"
-
I would have guessed that would have been easier for you guys to have someone else implement the solutions with your help :)
But its interesting to see what people go to when they have either pay or do the work themselves :)
Please, put the patches(if any) into the tickets on redmine. -
I'm trying to get my lot to buy some maintenance time but it's had work atm due to all the emergency services cut backs :(
-
So basically snort on amd64 is still broken.
well if it runs after running a command or two, it wouldn't be broken then! Any why not just run i386? Unless your pumping heavy traffic thru the box and need a lot of memory, I see no benefit running AMD64.
I have i386 on one of the boxes. For the box I want Snort on.. i386 is of no use as it can detect about 3.5GB. It made sense earlier when I started with 2GB RAM. I have 4GB RAM now and will be bumping it to 8GB this week. Traffic is extremely heavy, non-stop 24/7.. serving over 30 users on 4 different VLANs. Current bandwidth is 30/4. Will be switching to FTTH 50/25 (or more) soon.
What are your avg States and avg CPU? I'm running a Atom D510 with 4gigs of memory(3g is usable) 4 NICs, 2 VLANs and a couple of interfaces… I don't have a lot of users but I can can generated a lot of traffic to fill up my 50/5 pipe. I've been up to about 16000+ states out of 299000 available states and my memory still wasn't at 50%..
I take it these 30 users are doing a lot of P2P traffic?
-
The snort package for multiple interface would need some 'love' to work correctly in multi interfaces and not consume that many amounts of RAM.
The optimization would be to make snort memory usage constant and not be multiplied by the number of interfaces it is enabled on.But that is so far in the pipe of the snort package today since there are other things to fix today that…..
