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

    PfSense 2.5 will only work with AES-NI capable CPUs

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    169 Posts 46 Posters 91.2k Views
    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.
    • BBcan177B
      BBcan177 Moderator
      last edited by

      The Devs have indicated that there are other reasons for this new requirement. And it's not about VPNS etc. I think in the long term users will appreciate all the effort that pfSense is implementing to make this a solid and secure platform. Please keep the pitchforks at home.  ;)

      "Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it."

      Website: http://pfBlockerNG.com
      Twitter: @BBcan177  #pfBlockerNG
      Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/pfBlockerNG/new/

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        Synthetickiller
        last edited by

        I just happened to pop up on the forum to see what's up since my current j1900 celeron based "overkill" rig is running nicely. This really, really surprised me. People told me it was too much power, but now I'm lacking features of higher end cpus. LOL. I guess I can throw an old i5 3570k I have laying around at the issue & undervolt it. ::) No money out of pocket for me, but for most people, I totally understand the frustration.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • W
          W4RH34D
          last edited by

          I don't get the pullback.

          I'm excited for this.

          Did you really check your cables?

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

            What is the predicted release date for 2.5? I bet all your shoeboxes that can't do AES-NI will be obsolete anyway by that time.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • ivorI
              ivor
              last edited by

              @seidler2547:

              So our 5 PC Engines APU with the AMD G-T40E will become nice expensive paper weights? Well played, Netgate, well played, for trying to boost your own hardware sales.

              Netgate is not the only vendor selling hardware with AES-NI.

              Need help fast? Our support is available 24/7 https://www.netgate.com/support/

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • ivorI
                ivor
                last edited by

                @kpa:

                What is the predicted release date for 2.5? I bet all your shoeboxes that can't do AES-NI will be obsolete anyway by that time.

                2.5 will release in probably over a year. Depends when FreeBSD 12 is released. After pfSense 2.5 is released we will support 2.4 for about a year.

                Need help fast? Our support is available 24/7 https://www.netgate.com/support/

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

                  Funny english language. I wrote:

                  I bet all your shoeboxes that can't do AES-NI will be obsolete anyway by that time.

                  I meant that hardware that doesn't have an AES-NI capable CPU by the time 2.5 is released is likely to be obsolete at the time.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • ivorI
                    ivor
                    last edited by

                    @kpa:

                    Funny english language. I wrote:

                    I bet all your shoeboxes that can't do AES-NI will be obsolete anyway by that time.

                    I meant that hardware that doesn't have an AES-NI capable CPU by the time 2.5 is released is likely to be obsolete at the time.

                    Oh yes, sorry. I will edit that part ;)

                    Need help fast? Our support is available 24/7 https://www.netgate.com/support/

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • F
                      FranciscoFranco
                      last edited by

                      So when AES-NI is found to be a defective all users will be affected, instead of a subset of users.

                      Look at Intel ME experience for example. Is that what were going for? All racked servers affected.

                      Homogeneity is bad for security.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • ivorI
                        ivor
                        last edited by

                        @FranciscoFranco:

                        So when AES-NI is found to be a defective all users will be affected, instead of a subset of users.

                        Look at Intel ME experience for example. Is that what were going for? All racked servers affected.

                        Homogeneity is bad for security.

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AES_instruction_set

                        Need help fast? Our support is available 24/7 https://www.netgate.com/support/

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • S
                          seidler2547
                          last edited by

                          @ivor:

                          @seidler2547:

                          After all I had read, OPNsense is not really an alternative if you want honest software developed by trustworthy people,

                          I think you need to chill. You're welcome to use any kind of software you want, but don't claim we are dishonest or not trustworthy.

                          There's a "not" in my sentence, and I stand by it. So yes, I do think pfSense is better than it's fork (at least as of <2.5).

                          On another note though, proclaiming 2 year old hardware obsolete in 1 years time - not my cup of tea. I have servers here that are more than 5 years old and there is no need to replace them. I don't see any reason to replace our APUs which are running our AES256 OpenVPN traffic just fine without hardware acceleration at less than 10% load only because suddenly AES-NI becomes a requirement.

                          Stefan

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

                            Push the AES-NI requirement to pfSense 3.0 roadmap.

                            Lots of people here have re-purposed older hardware which they have under-volted and under-clocked with the plan to dial it up as needs arise..

                            Dropping 32-bit support recently was understandable but this is ludicrous!

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • W
                              W4RH34D
                              last edited by

                              @thehammer86:

                              Push the AES-NI requirement to pfSense 3.0 roadmap.

                              Lots of people here have re-purposed older hardware which they have under-volted and under-clocked with the plan to dial it up as needs arise..

                              Dropping 32-bit support recently was understandable but this is ludicrous!

                              Is it?  Or is it ludicrous to be running any internet facing hardware that is 6 years after EOL.  Is it not common knowledge that most hardware is designed with planned obsolescence?  This isn't a slap in the face to anyone IMO.

                              Did you really check your cables?

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • ivorI
                                ivor
                                last edited by

                                @seidler2547:

                                @ivor:

                                @seidler2547:

                                After all I had read, OPNsense is not really an alternative if you want honest software developed by trustworthy people,

                                I think you need to chill. You're welcome to use any kind of software you want, but don't claim we are dishonest or not trustworthy.

                                There's a "not" in my sentence, and I stand by it. So yes, I do think pfSense is better than it's fork (at least as of <2.5).

                                On another note though, proclaiming 2 year old hardware obsolete in 1 years time - not my cup of tea. I have servers here that are more than 5 years old and there is no need to replace them. I don't see any reason to replace our APUs which are running our AES256 OpenVPN traffic just fine without hardware acceleration at less than 10% load only because suddenly AES-NI becomes a requirement.

                                Stefan

                                Now I feel stupid. I am sorry as I have misread your initial comment. I have fixed it. Please note that we will be supporting pfSense 2.4 for around a year once 2.5 is out. 2.5 won't be out for over a year (really depends from FreeBSD 12 release date).

                                Need help fast? Our support is available 24/7 https://www.netgate.com/support/

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • jahonixJ
                                  jahonix
                                  last edited by

                                  Come on, just because a new version is out sometime in the future it doesn't mean the version you currently run (or that will be released in the foreseeable future, aka 2.3.4) is rendered useless.
                                  Same with 32bit hardware and v2.4 in the future. Just keep using 2.3.x on that.

                                  The goal of each and every pfSense installation I have out there is to do its job. And it does exactly that, otherwise I would have chosen a different solution. That won't change with a new release.
                                  My job is not to update all systems just because a new version is available. Is yours?

                                  Only if you want to run the latest version with all new bells and whistles you'll need moderatly new hardware for that. So what?

                                  This discussion reminds me of a crying kid whom you've taken away the favorite toy. With the exception that it is only an announcement due in 12+ months to get you prepared (with a new toy).
                                  So you're mourning a year or so in advance. Really?

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • G
                                    Gram
                                    last edited by

                                    I have pfSense running in SOHO environment using ATOM (Cedarview), with VPN, and no resource constraints whatsoever under light to moderate load. I've recommended the platform to others who've used it for ICS, and through AWS. I won't be able to, in good conscience, recommend the product with these restrictions. I won't be upgrading my hardware. I find AES-NI requirement more of a security weakness than enhancement, and will likely begin going with plain old *BSD.

                                    Bullrun aside, a 7 year old critical remote exploit was just disclosed in Intel's AMT. The CVE was published today: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-5689

                                    You guys chose a hell of a week to announce a baked in Intel requirement!

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • A
                                      athurdent
                                      last edited by

                                      Some additional info:
                                      https://www.reddit.com/r/PFSENSE/comments/68nd6y/pfsense_25_and_aesni/dh0qi53/

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • mudmanc4M
                                        mudmanc4
                                        last edited by

                                        @ivor:

                                        Now I feel stupid. I am sorry as I have misread your initial comment. I have fixed it. Please note that we will be supporting pfSense 2.4 for around a year once 2.5 is out. 2.5 won't be out for over a year (really depends from FreeBSD 12 release date).

                                        Actually, if this ~2 year timeline on 2.4 viability is even close, this announcement should be very well taken by everyone. 24 months is a professional notice time period.

                                        Maybe some could use to think about this for a moment before jumping in and venting in a negative manner.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • B
                                          bennyc
                                          last edited by

                                          Wow, that (full) reddit post kind of threw me of my chair  ::)
                                          Amazed by the anger/frustration.  If they put equal effort in coding as they do in trying to clarifying their motivations, hats off…
                                          Interesting read of Gonzo's post though, that's probably the best part (for me) as I learned new things.

                                          So I just got an actual legit reason to go looking for a new home router in the near future -> life is good ;D

                                          4x XG-7100 (2xHA), 1x SG-4860, 1x SG-2100
                                          1x PC Engines APU2C4, 1x PC Engines APU1C4

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • V
                                            VAMike
                                            last edited by

                                            @W4RH34D:

                                            @thehammer86:

                                            Push the AES-NI requirement to pfSense 3.0 roadmap.

                                            Lots of people here have re-purposed older hardware which they have under-volted and under-clocked with the plan to dial it up as needs arise..

                                            Dropping 32-bit support recently was understandable but this is ludicrous!

                                            Is it?  Or is it ludicrous to be running any internet facing hardware that is 6 years after EOL.

                                            The first one.

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