Snort 2.9.2.3 pkg v. 2.5.0 Issues
-
2.5.1 throws the following error which was not there before without changing any configuration (did complete reinstall):
FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_4672_em1/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(366) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.
[EDIT] Suprise: the preprocessor page is heavily modified and now we have to enable SSL data separately. It was unchecked and thats where the error came from. Doing further testing now.
-
bmeeks,
https://github.com/Fesoj/pfsense-packages/compare/patch-3 :)
Update: Initially I picked the wrong patch.
-
judex,
FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_4672_em1/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(366) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.
there is a section in the snort user's manual about the dynamic SSL preprocessor. I've never found a reason to activate this one.
On the other hand, did you activate this for the latest version or did the error message appear out of nowhere?
-
Thx for your answer and the investitgation you did during the last days Fesoj!
I edited my post because I found the new preproc settings and enabled SSL data there. Now snort starts without warning.
If I do not enable SSL-data an preproc page I get the errors from botnet-cnc and if disabled from exploit.rules…So I obviousely need it if I want to enable botnet rules etc.
-
I just updated the snort package and now upon restart its giving me
Jul 22 12:38:41 snort[26253]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_44959_re0/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(372) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.
Jul 22 12:38:41 snort[26253]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_44959_re0/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(372) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.I havent changed my rules/categories. The same as i have been running for some time.
Good news was when I updated I didnt get the errors in the system log like i did before upon completion of the install.
I noticed a new SSL option on the preprocesser Tab.
Enable that option and restarted no issues/errors so far.
I want to say thanks for all the work you all have been doing on this package to keep it updated/adding new features/ resolving bugs.
I cant imagine not having snort up and running. :-)
-
kilthro,
try to deactivate the rules that require the SSL preprocessor and see what happens. Then fiddle around with snort.conf for the associated interface(s). With some luck the snort user's manual contains sufficient info to do that.
Please report when things are running.
-
kilthro,
try to deactivate the rules that require the SSL preprocessor and see what happens. Then fiddle around with snort.conf for the associated interface(s). With some luck the snort user's manual contains sufficient info to do that.
Please report when things are running.
Sorry if my post was misleading. I had the error and I did get it to run fine after enabling the ssl option. I was just posting stating that I had the error, I found the new option and enabled it and all is working just fine now..
Just getting some strange mem cap reached alerts in snort now for pop normalization… Need to look into that.. Other than that, all appears good. Need to try the auto update out later . ;)
Thanks for your hard work with this package.
-
kilthro,
so the "Enable SSL Data" option was not checked? And after enabling it, the snort config was ok?
-
kilthro,
so the "Enable SSL Data" option was not checked? And after enabling it, the snort config was ok?
Correct. It wasnt enabled. Never seen the option there before. So I enabled it and it did fix the problem/error that I was having.
On a side note I am noticing
"(POP) No memory available for decoding. Memcap exceeded" - 07/22-13:01:54
in my alerts.. I dont see a memory setting in the snort package. Is this something now I have to adjust somewhere else? Never had it before until todays update.
-
bmeeks,
https://github.com/Fesoj/pfsense-packages/compare/patch-3 :)
Update: Initially I picked the wrong patch.
I see now, I misunderstood the full flow of the code. I was thinking the entire contents of the rule archive (either Emerging Threats or Snort) were extracted first in a temp directory, and then copied over to the working directory in pieces. That appears to be not true for everything. Looks like by the time the snippet of code I posted earlier gets executed, it's too late because code further up above has already overwritten the files. Changing the order as you did is the best idea for now.
I did have one thought, though. Is it not possible that from time to time there may be legitimate differences in the config files from Emerging Threats and Snort such that simply using the Snort version might cause a different problem? What about a technique that compared the two files and made sure all unique lines from both files got merged into the final classification.config and the other configuration files?
-
kilthro,
I dont see a memory setting in the snort package.
as far as I remember, the some of the snort preprocessors have this option. See the default snort.conf from the package (not the ones in the interface directories). Maybe that helps.
-
bmeeks,
What about a technique that compared the two files…
the best thing is probably to build a union of all type declarations and in case of duplicate entries, maybe the one with the longer description could be chosen. Looks like a freshman homework problem. :)
-
The issue with this snort thingy is that they do not seem to do a good job at keeping things isolated.
If you need preprocessor x for rule x there should be a better linkage of that, or displayed somewhere.Otherwise its very easy to break stuff.
Someone surely could go and identify which preprocessor inserts which rule option and parse the rules for that and do the enable disable during reload!
Is that worth doing?
Probably upstream should fix that rather than workaround that? -
I just updated the snort package and now upon restart its giving me
Jul 22 12:38:41 snort[26253]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_44959_re0/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(372) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.
Jul 22 12:38:41 snort[26253]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_44959_re0/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(372) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.I havent changed my rules/categories. The same as i have been running for some time.
Good news was when I updated I didnt get the errors in the system log like i did before upon completion of the install.
I noticed a new SSL option on the preprocesser Tab.
Enable that option and restarted no issues/errors so far.
I want to say thanks for all the work you all have been doing on this package to keep it updated/adding new features/ resolving bugs.
I cant imagine not having snort up and running. :-)
Where is this SSL option? I do not see it on any snort preprocessors tab. There is an "Sensitive Data" option although after it's checked, I'm not quite sure how to use or configure it?
-
I confirm that after the installation of the latest package (2.5.1) the issue of blocking whitelisted IPs has been resolved! :)
If I am right the problem with the auto-update is still pending.
@miles267: Please install the latest package and you will find there the SSL data Preprocessor.
-
I just updated the snort package and now upon restart its giving me
Jul 22 12:38:41 snort[26253]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_44959_re0/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(372) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.
Jul 22 12:38:41 snort[26253]: FATAL ERROR: /usr/local/etc/snort/snort_44959_re0/rules/snort_botnet-cnc.rules(372) Unknown rule option: 'ssl_state'.I havent changed my rules/categories. The same as i have been running for some time.
Good news was when I updated I didnt get the errors in the system log like i did before upon completion of the install.
I noticed a new SSL option on the preprocesser Tab.
Enable that option and restarted no issues/errors so far.
I want to say thanks for all the work you all have been doing on this package to keep it updated/adding new features/ resolving bugs.
I cant imagine not having snort up and running. :-)
Where is this SSL option? I do not see it on any snort preprocessors tab. There is an "Sensitive Data" option although after it's checked, I'm not quite sure how to use or configure it?
What version are you on? I am on 2.9.2.3 pkg v. 2.5.1
On the preporcessor tab (within the interface your monitoring) right above enable sensitive data is one that says enable ssl data. That is the one I turned on. If the option is not there, I would suggest upgrading or reinstalling the package. -
ermal,
If you need preprocessor x for rule x there should be a better linkage of that, or displayed somewhere.
it's even more complicated, because snort allows to maintain state info between different rules (the "flowbits" stuff). In order to get a consistent set of activated preprocessors and rules, one should also scan all enabled and disabled rules, look at the required preprocessors and the corresponding flowbits statements (set, isset, …). If you view all these items as resources, a dependency graph should be created and then evaluate the graph for all activated items and write the proper configuration files, which might include activating previously disabled rules.
Is it worth it? I typically have only a few manageable rules and hardly need anything more than http_inspect (more or less), so I wouldn't need it. But, it might be a cool feature---you click on a single rule, dependencies are evaluated, and dependent rules and preprocs are "drawn in" by a ghost hand.
-
ermal,
If you need preprocessor x for rule x there should be a better linkage of that, or displayed somewhere.
it's even more complicated, because snort allows to maintain state info between different rules (the "flowbits" stuff). In order to get a consistent set of activated preprocessors and rules, one should also scan all enabled and disabled rules, look at the required preprocessors and the corresponding flowbits statements (set, isset, …). If you view all these items as resources, a dependency graph should be created and then evaluate the graph for all activated items and write the proper configuration files, which might include activating previously disabled rules.
Is it worth it? I typically have only a few manageable rules and hardly need anything more than http_inspect (more or less), so I wouldn't need it. But, it might be a cool feature---you click on a single rule, dependencies are evaluated, and dependent rules and preprocs are "drawn in" by a ghost hand.
I'm still a Snort rookie, but aren't the above tasks exactly what the Pulled Pork help application is supposed to accomplish automatically? If so, is there a way to incorporate it into the pfSense build of Snort? I will do some more research on how Pulled Pork operates, but off the top of my head I seem to remember it was a command-line utility (Perl script, I think) that does the magic.
-
bmeeks,
i am not sure that you can tell pulledpork these are my preprocessors make my snort start!
-
bmeeks,
exactly. I haven't used PulledPork so far. Perl would again be part of the Snort package. I'd think that evaluating PulledPork should be done and then coding should be in php. GUI-wise only an option "Enable auto dependencies" or s.th. like that would suffice. Generating the dependency graph should not be too difficult.
