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

    pfBlockerNG-devel feedback

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved pfBlockerNG
    102 Posts 26 Posters 100.5k 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.
    • RonpfSR
      RonpfS @occamsrazor
      last edited by RonpfS

      @occamsrazor
      IPV4 operates in the IP space. It can take domain names and convert them to IPs before building the tables.

      DNSBL operates in the DNS space, that is only with domain names.

      Instead of using Whitelist, why don't you suppress IPs instead?

      2.4.5-RELEASE-p1 (amd64)
      Intel Core2 Quad CPU Q8400 @ 2.66GHz 8GB
      Backup 0.5_5, Bandwidthd 0.7.4_4, Cron 0.3.7_5, pfBlockerNG-devel 3.0.0_16, Status_Traffic_Totals 2.3.1_1, System_Patches 1.2_5

      occamsrazorO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • occamsrazorO
        occamsrazor @RonpfS
        last edited by

        @ronpfs said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

        Instead of using Whitelist, why don't you suppress IPs instead?

        What would be the advantage of that way vs whitelist? In the IPV4 Suppression box I thought you could only enter ranges not individual IPs. But I guess you can enter them with /32 netmask, right?

        pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
        Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
        Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • JeGrJ
          JeGr LAYER 8 Moderator
          last edited by

          @BBcan177 just a quick question: I checked on pfBlockerNG devel on a 2.4.4 snapshot system. Still shows php56-5.6.34 as dependency. As 2.4.4 runs on php7.2 I'm wondering, why pfBNG requires usage of the old PHP version (in package manager listing)?

          Don't forget to upvote 👍 those who kindly offered their time and brainpower to help you!

          If you're interested, I'm available to discuss details of German-speaking paid support (for companies) if needed.

          BBcan177B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • BBcan177B
            BBcan177 Moderator @JeGr
            last edited by

            @jegr said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

            I checked on pfBlockerNG devel on a 2.4.4 snapshot system. Still shows php56-5.6.34 as dependency. As 2.4.4 runs on php7.2 I'm wondering, why pfBNG requires usage of the old PHP version (in package manager listing)?

            The pfSense devs manage that integration. Here is the commit to the makefile:
            https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-ports/commit/54dd3d529ac6a55cd0c1e05f0c3956fb668d7cbd

            There seem to be some hiccups with this but I believe it to be part of the base pfSense code.

            "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/

            JeGrJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • JeGrJ
              JeGr LAYER 8 Moderator @BBcan177
              last edited by JeGr

              @bbcan177 no problem, just wanted to ask as that drew my attention :)

              Edit: My mistake, I set the system to "stable" after updating to 2.4.4-snapshots, to get it to 2.4.4-Release without any further snapshot. That switched Packages back to displaying 2.4.3 info, so the PHP version was old. Switching it back to snaps shows a correct 7.2.9 - my bad!

              Don't forget to upvote 👍 those who kindly offered their time and brainpower to help you!

              If you're interested, I'm available to discuss details of German-speaking paid support (for companies) if needed.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • BBcan177B
                BBcan177 Moderator
                last edited by BBcan177

                @jegr said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                @bbcan177 no problem, just wanted to ask as that drew my attention :)

                I did some tests and the only way I could get the PHP version to be out of sync was to set the 2.4.4 machine to use the pfSense 2.3.x branch ?

                EDIT: Haha... yes, I was typing as you made your edit !! :)

                "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/

                JeGrJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • JeGrJ
                  JeGr LAYER 8 Moderator @BBcan177
                  last edited by

                  @bbcan177 said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                  @jegr said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                  @bbcan177 no problem, just wanted to ask as that drew my attention :)

                  I did some tests and the only way I could get the PHP version to be out of sync was to set the 2.4.4 machine to use the pfSense 2.3.x branch ?

                  EDIT: Haha... yes, I was typing as you made your edit !! :)

                  Haha 😄 I was curious, too, as I read through the GIT intel so I backtracked and facepalmed over my own stupidity. Serves me right, better double check my facts before calling bugs 😉

                  Don't forget to upvote 👍 those who kindly offered their time and brainpower to help you!

                  If you're interested, I'm available to discuss details of German-speaking paid support (for companies) if needed.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • occamsrazorO
                    occamsrazor
                    last edited by

                    No big deal but just to let you know these feeds have been getting download errors for the last few days..... at least for me.

                    0_1536825395478_download fails.jpg

                    pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
                    Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
                    Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

                    BBcan177B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • B
                      bartkowski
                      last edited by

                      @BBcan177 Can you see my post https://forum.netgate.com/topic/135362/geoip-policy-based-routing-not-working-with-pfblockerng-devel
                      To me it appears as an issue with the new version.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • BBcan177B
                        BBcan177 Moderator @occamsrazor
                        last edited by

                        @occamsrazor

                        Blutmagie needs to have the State set to "flex" since the TLS settings or the certificates of the site are poor.

                        For the Dan.me feed, they have rate-limiting. You can move that feed into its own Alias "TOR2" and set it update every 4 hours... I might have to adjust the Feeds Tab to account for this issue. I have been after Dan.me for several months to try to improve this issue. Part of the problem is that pfBlockerNG checks the last-time-stamp of the Feed and Dan.me is counting this as a download attempt which causes the rate-limiting issue.

                        "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
                        • U
                          un1que
                          last edited by

                          Since some days I have some troubles using pfBlockerNG. From time to time there appears a notification:

                          There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:52: cannot define table pfB_Level4_v4: Cannot allocate memory - The line in question reads [52]: table <pfB_Level4_v4> persist file "/var/db/aliastables/pfB_Level4_v4.txt"
                          @ 2018-09-16 00:38:28
                          

                          Has anyone an idea what the solution might be?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • BBcan177B
                            BBcan177 Moderator
                            last edited by BBcan177

                            @un1que said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                            Cannot allocate memory

                            Need to increase the pfSense > System > Advanced > Firewall & NAT > Firewall Maximum Table Entries
                            The package defaults it to "2000000", but you might need to increase that value depending on how many Aliastable entries you have.

                            "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/

                            U 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • U
                              un1que @BBcan177
                              last edited by

                              @bbcan177
                              Thanks for your reply! I’ll try that.

                              I now reloaded the IP values via force update and at the end of that process I found those numbers:

                              pfSense Table Stats
                              -------------------
                              table-entries hard limit  2000000
                              Table Usage Count         104384
                              

                              Before your hint I had 600000 table entries set in advanced settings. But for only about 100k used entries it should have been enough, isn’t it?

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • RonpfSR
                                RonpfS
                                last edited by

                                And the table-entries hard limit was showing 600000 in pfblockerng.log before you made the change ?

                                2.4.5-RELEASE-p1 (amd64)
                                Intel Core2 Quad CPU Q8400 @ 2.66GHz 8GB
                                Backup 0.5_5, Bandwidthd 0.7.4_4, Cron 0.3.7_5, pfBlockerNG-devel 3.0.0_16, Status_Traffic_Totals 2.3.1_1, System_Patches 1.2_5

                                U 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • U
                                  un1que @RonpfS
                                  last edited by

                                  @ronpfs
                                  I can’t say yet, but I think at the end of the force update process it was showing 600k instead of 2mio now, yes.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • GrimsonG
                                    Grimson Banned
                                    last edited by

                                    I just updated from v2.2.5_15 to v2.2.5_16, now the "pfBlockerNG firewall filter service" refuses to start, according to the dashboard status. There are no errors in the logs (checked both pfB logs and system logs).

                                    BBcan177B occamsrazorO 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • BBcan177B
                                      BBcan177 Moderator @Grimson
                                      last edited by BBcan177

                                      @grimson said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                                      I just updated from v2.2.5_15 to v2.2.5_16, now the "pfBlockerNG firewall filter service" refuses to start, according to the dashboard status. There are no errors in the logs (checked both pfB logs and system logs).

                                      Can you check this:
                                      https://forum.netgate.com/topic/135893/getting-crash-reports-after-updating-to-2-4-4/24

                                      php -v
                                      php_pfb -v
                                      

                                      Versions should match.

                                      You can also try to start from the shell to see if it shows any errors:

                                      /usr/local/etc/rc.d/pfb_filter.sh restart
                                      

                                      "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/

                                      GrimsonG 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • BBcan177B
                                        BBcan177 Moderator @Grimson
                                        last edited by BBcan177

                                        @grimson said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                                        I just updated from v2.2.5_15 to v2.2.5_16, now the "pfBlockerNG firewall filter service" refuses to start, according to the dashboard status. There are no errors in the logs (checked both pfB logs and system logs).

                                        I think its running:

                                        ps auxww | grep pfb
                                        
                                        /usr/local/bin/php_pfb -f /usr/local/pkg/pfblockerng/pfblockerng.inc filterlog (php)
                                        

                                        But now thats its a symlink and not a link, the Services function might not see the executable "php_pfb".

                                        So as long as your still getting firewall events in the Alerts/Reports tab, then it is still working, just not showing that in the the services status as "running".

                                        Still investigating...

                                        "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 1
                                        • occamsrazorO
                                          occamsrazor @Grimson
                                          last edited by

                                          @grimson said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                                          I just updated from v2.2.5_15 to v2.2.5_16, now the "pfBlockerNG firewall filter service" refuses to start, according to the dashboard status. There are no errors in the logs (checked both pfB logs and system logs).

                                          Just to chime in... same situation here, was shown as running Services before I upgraded to v2.2.5_16 but not now.

                                          pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
                                          Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
                                          Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • BBcan177B
                                            BBcan177 Moderator
                                            last edited by

                                            @occamsrazor said in pfBlockerNG-devel feedback:

                                            Just to chime in... same situation here, was shown as running Services before I upgraded to v2.2.5_16 but not now.

                                            I posted a PR which reverts the symlink change... Will be v2.2.5_17 once that is merged.

                                            https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-ports/pull/575

                                            "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/

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