PfBlockerNG v2.0 w/DNSBL

mgchristensen

Thank you BBcan!

Perhaps what I did will help somebody else? What I did: per your suggestion, I got rid of the bridge. I had the bridge because I could not figure out how to get the three wireless APs (one ath/Atheros type PCIe card, and two run/Realtek type on USB) to connect. without it. Took me a few evenings to rethink everything, but now it seems to be working as I wish.

The SuperMicro A1SAi-27f0F has four ethernet, igb0 to igb4. My current configuration: WAN is assigned to igb0, igb1 to igb3 is configured as LAGG0. LAN is assigned to LAGG0. Three ports on my switch are also configured to match the LAGG. OPTx interfaces are assigned to each of the three wireless APs. Under Interfaces: LAN, I configured the "Static IPv4 configuration" to 192.168.x.x/16 instead of 192.168.x.x/24. Under Services: DHCP server, on the LAN tab I set a range of IPs to be served out that did not include all possible IPs in the 192.168.x.x/16 range. That made it possible for me to assign a separate range of IPs to be served out by each OPTx interface. Now, the LAN interface no longer gets assigned the DNSBL IP on reboot.

Off topic for this post, but it occurs to me that a useful feature would be the ability to create a network port from tha MAC of an AP that is not connected to the pfSense box, but hanging off a switch on another part of the network. Then you could assign an OPTx interface to it and a tab for it would show up under Services: DHCP server, like the tabs for the OPTx interfaces that are actually connected to the pfSense box. OK, is the abyss of my ignorance showing again? Is this what VLANs are for?

BBcan177

"Beware, even things on Amazon come with embedded malware…" Mike Olsen
http://artfulhacker.com/post/142519805054/beware-even-things-on-amazon-come

https://blog.sucuri.net/2011/03/brenz-pl-is-back-with-malicious-iframes.html

This malicious domain is in DNSBL Feed - MDS - Malware Domains List :)

grep "brenz[.]pl" /var/db/pfblockerng/dnsbl/*
/var/db/pfblockerng/dnsbl/MDS.txt:local-data: "brenz[.]pl 60 IN A 10.10.10.1"

Other recent articles of interest:
http://researchcenter.paloaltonetworks.com/2016/04/unit42-ramdo/
http://blog.talosintel.com/2016/04/nuclear-tor.html

Ramosel

BBcan177

I haven't made any changes to my system for a few weeks… or at least since the recent pfBlockerNG updates. Now, in my IPv4 "Allow" rule you helped me setup, I can't make any changes. It keeps returning:

Header field cannot contain special or international characters.

So I backed out and just left the entries that were there and get the same return. The only non Alphas in the Headers are "." and "-". Both those have been there a couple months. Has something changed?

Rick

BBcan177

Hey Rick,

Yes I added input validation to that field recently… So you can use an "_" underscore instead of "-".

Ramosel

@BBcan177:

Yes I added input validation to that field recently… So you can use an "_" underscore instead of "-".

Good to know. It does like the "" underscore but won't accept "." periods any more. Not complaining just letting you know… I had to remove ALL non-alpha characters to get the list to save even without adding anything new. Once saved without any non-alphas, I was able to add a Whois/ASN and in the header use a "" to get things to clean up verbiage.

Thanks,
Rick

BBcan177

Hey Rick,

Previously it would strip out any special characters. So if you entered a Header as "example.list", it would change that to "examplelist".. With the input validation, it lets you know to avoid special or international characters and ask that you fix them before it will save…

MakesSense

I am really stuck… Have been searching for an answer for days now and I very seldom give up.

I have PFSense 2.2.6 with pfBlockerNG 2.0.6 installed on a VPS that only as a single WAN interface VTNET0

The aim of the server is simply to act as a remote inbound DNS server that blocks a range of blacklists via pfBlockerNG when queried otherwise it just delivers the usual DNS lookup.

I have an open port 53 for DNS resolver and that works just fine.

THE PROBLEM... pfBlockerNG refuses to LOG any ALERTS (alerts TAB) or ERRORS in LOG (logs TAB). It says those log files don't exist. (error.log dnsbl.log)

On the DNSBL Tab the "DNSBL Listening Interface" has [] nothing listed. Due to fact its looking for a LAN segment. So its not showing LOOPBACK or WAN of course.

I tried to create a VLAN but didn't help as that locked me out of the system and I had to recover via console. (webconfig jumped to VLAN and locked out WAN)

Snort works with logging and alerts just fine. And pfBlockerNG has all the other logs working just fine. The PFsense firewall log works but that doesn't show what is being blocked exactly.

So my conclusion is that it fails to show alerts and some logs due to the fact it can't bind with the LAN segment. I have no way of adding a LAN to this VPS.

Is there some kind of work around, patch or something I can do? I need to see whats being blocked in the ALERT section!

Please help :)

BBcan177

Hi MakesSense,

Can you not add a local interface just for DNSBL?

erwintwr

hi guys

Thx firstly for a very awesome addon! - will definitely see if company can forward some $$'s your way :)

i am firstly implementing some block lists to allow specific country access, and after a few recommendations on the forum i only added a permit rule for the countries where we require access from, specifically targeting a specific port alias set,

pfblocker config is set to permit inbound , with enable custom port checked and an alias loaded with the ports i want open.
This morning i notice some alerts, with a permit firing for ports that is not in the alias rule
eg port 443 / 100 is not on the alias list - only 5401

the firewall rules summary page seems to be ok :

but if i click on edit on one of the rules, it strangely does not show the port that is being blocked

PFblocker config (Countries -> Africa)

Can anyone recommend maybe what i could be missing?

Thx

EDIT

never mind , managed to solve this ( a little bit of reading helps)

changed the protocol to TCP/UDP ( not any), and reloaded everything. seems to be ok now :)

MakesSense

@BBcan177:

Hi MakesSense,

Can you not add a local interface just for DNSBL?

Hi BBcan177,

Unfortunately I can't seem to find any way to add a LAN interface on this VPS system.
Is there any way to fake one? or any other alternative ideas?
I have about 150 people using the pfSense/pfBlockerNG server now but really struggling to figure out what is blocking.

asgard

Hi,

If pfBlockerNG could be configured to do online lookup against block lists like e.g. zen.spamhaus.org and bl.spamcop.net this would be a great new feature since these lists contains a lot more IP's then the drop lists. I'm currently using the Postfix Forwarder package for this but this package is no longer available since version 2.3.

theflu

I had a list in pfBlockerNG and I removed it. Its gone from the pfBlocker GUI, but it is still on my dashboard widget and I get these warnings all the time. Unresolvable destination alias 'pfB_iBlockYoyoAdServers' for rule 'pfB_iBlockYoyoAdServers auto rule' @ 2016-04-14 16:00:03

I tried update, cron and refresh all in pfBlockerNG

Ran:
pfctl -t pfB_iBlockYoyoAdServers -T kill

Output: 0 table removed

Ran: pfctl -s all
Did not see a table with that name

I have tried to uninstall pfBlocker w/keep setting uncheck. The list is still there when I reinstall.

pfSense 2.3

theflu

@theflu:

I had a list in pfBlockerNG and I removed it. Its gone from the pfBlocker GUI, but it is still on my dashboard widget and I get these warnings all the time. Unresolvable destination alias 'pfB_iBlockYoyoAdServers' for rule 'pfB_iBlockYoyoAdServers auto rule' @ 2016-04-14 16:00:03

I tried update, cron and refresh all in pfBlockerNG

Ran:
pfctl -t pfB_iBlockYoyoAdServers -T kill

Output: 0 table removed

Ran: pfctl -s all
Did not see a table with that name

I have tried to uninstall pfBlocker w/keep setting uncheck. The list is still there when I reinstall.

pfSense 2.3

I fixed my issue. I deleted the entries in Firewall >> Rules for LAN and WAN that reference the list I wanted to remove. The list is gone from the dashboard and I am not getting the error anymore.

robwalker5561

Hello,

I have just built a clean install of 2.3 and install pfBlockerNG and added a bunch of lists from i-BlockList

However, I am getting these lists blocking DNS traffic to the router itself

I've worked around this with a permit rule at higher priority … but it doesn't seem to be the right solution. Does this imply one of the lists has the LAN's non-routable addresses in it?

BBcan177

Hi robwalker5561,

Run these commands and it will show if there is a loopback address (Won't be the first time that IBlock does this :) ):

grep "127\.0\.0\." /var/db/pfblockerng/deny/*
grep "127\.0\.0\." /var/db/pfblockerng/dnsbl/*
grep "127\.0\.0\." /var/db/aliastables/*

If it finds a loopback, then enable "Suppression" in the General Tab, and run a "Force Reload" to clear it out…

robwalker5561

Thank you for the reply.

Those commands don't match any entries (nor does a regex for 192.168. or my WAN IP address)

The help for 'Suppression' says:

This will prevent Selected IPs from being blocked. Only for IPv4 lists (/32 and /24).

Which sound great … the correct approach is to then modify the pfBlockerNGSuppress alias manually with the local IP?

@BBcan177:

Hi robwalker5561,

Run these commands and it will show if there is a loopback address (Won't be the first time that IBlock does this :) ):
grep "127\.0\.0\." /var/db/pfblockerng/deny/*
grep "127\.0\.0\." /var/db/pfblockerng/dnsbl/*
grep "127\.0\.0\." /var/db/aliastables/*
If it finds a loopback, then enable "Suppression" in the General Tab, and run a "Force Reload" to clear it out…

BBcan177

From your original screenshot: How can you have both src and dst with a 192.168.1.x address range? Are you double Natting? WAN/LAN should be in separate IP ranges…

robwalker5561

Shouldn't be anything too complicated going on … at least not by design, I probably misconfigured something:

192.168.1.6 is a box on the LAN

192.168.1.1 is the gateway's LAN interface (a /24), its WAN is 192.168.209.14 which is NAT'd because that is all the modem exposes

The rules configuration is:

@BBcan177:

From your original screenshot: How can you have both src and dst with a 192.168.1.x address range? Are you double Natting? WAN/LAN should be in separate IP ranges…

BBcan177

Is this alert repeating? It says "no match" in the pic… So maybe it was being blocked previously. Clear the Firewall logs, and see if it re-appears...

yea

Hi

Using the latest version of pfsense and pfblockerng, when setting to allow an ipv4 rule, it generates an auto rule. I thought, when using the advanced inbound rules that this would modify the auto rule. Instead, it just appears to ignore these settings and create a default auto open rule for dest/port - though it correctly retains the src. Also, when modifying the auto rule every subsequent modification to the pfblocker rule rewrites and resets the auto rule.

Is this by design?

Thanks (fantastic package btw!)