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

    Setup DNS over TLS on pfSense 2.4.4 p2 - Guide

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved DHCP and DNS
    67 Posts 17 Posters 39.2k 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.
    • johnpozJ
      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
      last edited by johnpoz

      You do understand that the dnssec if your going to forward is pointless right... Using quad9 will pass the dnssec test you pointed to be it you enable dnssec or not... Since they do dnssec without you having enable it..

      Just setup your end machine to point to quad9 for dns... Then run that test you linked too.

      If your going to forward in unbound, there is ZERO reason to checkbox the dnssec. Resolvers validate dnssec, not forwarders.

      dnssec works

      $ dig @9.9.9.9 www.dnssec-failed.org
      
      ; <<>> DiG 9.12.3-P1 <<>> @9.9.9.9 www.dnssec-failed.org
      ; (1 server found)
      ;; global options: +cmd
      ;; Got answer:
      ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 5771
      ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
      
      ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
      ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
      ;; QUESTION SECTION:
      ;www.dnssec-failed.org.         IN      A
      
      ;; Query time: 24 msec
      ;; SERVER: 9.9.9.9#53(9.9.9.9)
      ;; WHEN: Wed Jan 23 05:50:43 Central Standard Time 2019
      ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 50
      

      non dnssec dns server.

      $ dig @4.2.2.2 www.dnssec-failed.org
      
      ; <<>> DiG 9.12.3-P1 <<>> @4.2.2.2 www.dnssec-failed.org
      ; (1 server found)
      ;; global options: +cmd
      ;; Got answer:
      ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 17404
      ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
      
      ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
      ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 8192
      ;; QUESTION SECTION:
      ;www.dnssec-failed.org.         IN      A
      
      ;; ANSWER SECTION:
      www.dnssec-failed.org.  7200    IN      A       69.252.193.191
      www.dnssec-failed.org.  7200    IN      A       68.87.109.242
      
      ;; Query time: 34 msec
      ;; SERVER: 4.2.2.2#53(4.2.2.2)
      ;; WHEN: Wed Jan 23 05:51:46 Central Standard Time 2019
      ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 82
      

      So go ahead and remove your checkbox from dnssec in unbound, and try your test again.. Having your forwarder do dnssec is pretty freaking pointless, and only causes unneeded dns traffic.

      An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
      If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
      Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
      SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

      L T 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 3
      • B
        bcruze
        last edited by

        so your custom options within DNS resolver is left.. blank?

        i am still following the directions posted from https://www.netgate.com/blog/dns-over-tls-with-pfsense.html

        bepoB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • bepoB
          bepo @bcruze
          last edited by

          @bcruze this custom option was necessary on previous version of pfSense. Now you have a checkbox for this. "Use SSL/TLS for outgoing DNS Queries to Forwarding Server"

          Please use the thumbs up button if you received a helpful advice. Thank you!

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
          • L
            LaUs3r @johnpoz
            last edited by

            @johnpoz said in Setup DNS over TLS on pfSense 2.4.4 p2 - Guide:

            You do understand that the dnssec if your going to forward is pointless right... Using quad9 will pass the dnssec test you pointed to be it you enable dnssec or not... Since they do dnssec without you having enable it..

            Just setup your end machine to point to quad9 for dns... Then run that test you linked too.

            If your going to forward in unbound, there is ZERO reason to checkbox the dnssec. Resolvers validate dnssec, not forwarders.

            dnssec works

            $ dig @9.9.9.9 www.dnssec-failed.org
            
            ; <<>> DiG 9.12.3-P1 <<>> @9.9.9.9 www.dnssec-failed.org
            ; (1 server found)
            ;; global options: +cmd
            ;; Got answer:
            ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 5771
            ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
            
            ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
            ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
            ;; QUESTION SECTION:
            ;www.dnssec-failed.org.         IN      A
            
            ;; Query time: 24 msec
            ;; SERVER: 9.9.9.9#53(9.9.9.9)
            ;; WHEN: Wed Jan 23 05:50:43 Central Standard Time 2019
            ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 50
            

            non dnssec dns server.

            $ dig @4.2.2.2 www.dnssec-failed.org
            
            ; <<>> DiG 9.12.3-P1 <<>> @4.2.2.2 www.dnssec-failed.org
            ; (1 server found)
            ;; global options: +cmd
            ;; Got answer:
            ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 17404
            ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
            
            ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
            ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 8192
            ;; QUESTION SECTION:
            ;www.dnssec-failed.org.         IN      A
            
            ;; ANSWER SECTION:
            www.dnssec-failed.org.  7200    IN      A       69.252.193.191
            www.dnssec-failed.org.  7200    IN      A       68.87.109.242
            
            ;; Query time: 34 msec
            ;; SERVER: 4.2.2.2#53(4.2.2.2)
            ;; WHEN: Wed Jan 23 05:51:46 Central Standard Time 2019
            ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 82
            

            So go ahead and remove your checkbox from dnssec in unbound, and try your test again.. Having your forwarder do dnssec is pretty freaking pointless, and only causes unneeded dns traffic.

            @johnpoz , yeah you are 100% right. Thx for the explanation. I'll update the post accordingly and put the DNSSEC-checkbox to "Unchecked"

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • N
              no_jah
              last edited by

              I have a couple of questions,

              Is it still possible to use internal DNS on port 53 when you use this setup, and I also would like to know on what interface the floating rules are applied?

              L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • L
                LaUs3r @no_jah
                last edited by

                @no_jah said in Setup DNS over TLS on pfSense 2.4.4 p2 - Guide:

                I have a couple of questions,

                Is it still possible to use internal DNS on port 53 when you use this setup, and I also would like to know on what interface the floating rules are applied?

                yes, it is possible to use port 53. Just make sure that the port is open.

                Regarding the interface: I use a VPN connection for my whole traffic. That's why the interface in my case is called TGINTERFACE and not WAN. The most common setup is to use the WAN interface for the internet traffic. If this is the case for you, select the WAN interface.

                Cheers

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

                  This post is deleted!
                  L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • L
                    LaUs3r @bcruze
                    last edited by

                    @bcruze said in Setup DNS over TLS on pfSense 2.4.4 p2 - Guide:

                    why isn't the top option checked : Respond to incoming SSL/TLS queries from local clients

                    well, you could check it. I simply wasn't aware about that option, but it could make sense depending on your config

                    @bcruze said in Setup DNS over TLS on pfSense 2.4.4 p2 - Guide:

                    i've followed this step again. and states still shows :

                    (192.168.1.246:40971) -> 1.1.1.1:53
                    that is somehow strange. Do you use a local config maybe for this client? can you post it please?

                    TAC57T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • TAC57T
                      TAC57 @LaUs3r
                      last edited by

                      @LaUs3r
                      When I turn on the floating rule to block port 53 I can do google searches but can't get to any other websites. If I disable the port 53 blocking rule then I can get to any site but the pfSense packet capture report shows traffic on port to 8.8.8.8. I'm really not sure where Googles DNS is coming from. Do you have any suggestions on how I might change the port 53 blocking rule?

                      Packet Capture on port 53 give me:
                      15:23:28.505900 IP 75.xxx.xxx.xxx.32041 > 8.8.8.8.53: UDP, length 33
                      15:23:28.535878 IP 8.8.8.8.53 > 75.xxx.xxx.xxx.32041: UDP, length 49

                      365f474f-7186-4fcb-b8bc-6da26c63edf4-image.png

                      f9e6214b-0768-40ec-9ee2-5a32d8f40582-image.png

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • TAC57T
                        TAC57 @LaUs3r
                        last edited by

                        @LaUs3r

                        With this rule why would I be seeing any port 53 traffic with packet capture?

                        0157109a-9e6b-4705-a673-d46b9c37c5ee-image.png

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • johnpozJ
                          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                          last edited by

                          packet captures have nothing to do with what actually shows up on the interface.. Just tells pfsense what to do with traffic sees on the interface, either allow it and process it, or block it (drop it without doing anything with it).

                          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                          TAC57T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • TAC57T
                            TAC57 @johnpoz
                            last edited by

                            @johnpoz so you don't agree with @LaUs3r that Package Capture can be use to verify that ALL DNS traffic to the outside world is going out over TLS (port 853) and there is no leakage on port 53? Per the guide above, I'm seeing 9.9.9.9:853 TCP traffic with Diagnostic | States and 9.9.9.9:853 traffic with Diagnostic | Packet Capture. But I am also seeing 8.8.8.8:53 traffic.

                            Per your comment just because I'm seeing some 8.8.8.8 traffic with packet capture doesn't mean it's going out on the WAN?
                            Packet Capture on port 53 give me:
                            15:23:28.505900 IP 75.xxx.xxx.xxx.32041 > 8.8.8.8.53: UDP, length 33
                            15:23:28.535878 IP 8.8.8.8.53 > 75.xxx.xxx.xxx.32041: UDP, length 49
                            .
                            .
                            .

                            Is there a feature in pfSense that I can confirm I have DNS over TLS with no leakage or should I just assume if the floating firewall rule I've shown above will assure that no port 53 traffic is getting out of my network.

                            Thanks for all you comments.

                            p.s. Could I setup the floating DNS port 53 blocking rule on either the WAN or LAN interface, assuming I didn't care about my DMZ?

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • johnpozJ
                              johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                              last edited by johnpoz

                              Huh? Where did I say that? My point is you can block all day on LAN, and then sniff on Lan and see packet captures with it.

                              You can block all day on LAN for 53, and you could still see outbound on your wan for 53... Maybe pfsense itself was set to directly ask 8.8.8.8 in its general settings vs JUST loopback..

                              As to floating rules for 853.. Why would think you need those in the first place?

                              And you can not stop pfsense from talking outbound, you can put rules all day long on floating tab.. Traffic generated by pfsense can not be blocked... There are HIDDEN rules.. So you could create an any or out rule on your wan for 53 in floating, make it quick - and still pfsense would be allowed out.

                              So why don't you actually open up the sniff of that to 53 traffic and see what the query was actually for.. Which should give you some clue to its origin.

                              But yes you can sniff on your wan, for port 53 to catch any traffic that was going out of your network to validate your setup is working..

                              An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                              If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                              Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                              SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • T
                                TDJ211 @johnpoz
                                last edited by

                                @johnpoz said in Setup DNS over TLS on pfSense 2.4.4 p2 - Guide:

                                You do understand that the dnssec if your going to forward is pointless right... Using quad9 will pass the dnssec test you pointed to be it you enable dnssec or not... Since they do dnssec without you having enable it..

                                Just setup your end machine to point to quad9 for dns... Then run that test you linked too.

                                If your going to forward in unbound, there is ZERO reason to checkbox the dnssec. Resolvers validate dnssec, not forwarders.

                                dnssec works

                                So go ahead and remove your checkbox from dnssec in unbound, and try your test again.. Having your forwarder do dnssec is pretty freaking pointless, and only causes unneeded dns traffic.

                                Does the same hold true DNSSEC is unnecessary when in forwarding mode for cloudflare 1.1.1.1 ?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • GertjanG
                                  Gertjan
                                  last edited by

                                  Rule of thumb : when forwarding, dnssec is useless/won't work/has no sense.

                                  No "help me" PM's please. Use the forum, the community will thank you.
                                  Edit : and where are the logs ??

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                  • R
                                    Repo @LaUs3r
                                    last edited by

                                    @LaUs3r

                                    Having DNSSEC enabled not only is not necessary but it breaks the function of TLS.

                                    Cloudflares DNS checker shows it not working if DNSSEC is running at least.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • johnpozJ
                                      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                                      last edited by

                                      having dnssec enabled shouldn't break dot.. But when your forwarding - dnssec is pointless.. If you forward and where you forward their resolver is doing dnssec, you get it by default... If not, then you asking for it doesn't get you anything..

                                      When you forward - dnssec should be OFF, no matter how you look at it.

                                      An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                                      If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                                      Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                                      SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • jimpJ
                                        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                                        last edited by

                                        DNSSEC is for validating authenticity (prevent spoofing, hijacked authoritative nameservers, etc).

                                        DNS over TLS is for encrypting transport (privacy).

                                        They do different things and are both are useful, especially together, for increased security and privacy.

                                        There is no reason you can't run both, unless whatever you are forwarding to does not support one or the other.

                                        Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                                        Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                                        Do not Chat/PM for help!

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • johnpozJ
                                          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                                          last edited by johnpoz

                                          @jimp said in Setup DNS over TLS on pfSense 2.4.4 p2 - Guide:

                                          There is no reason you can't run both, unless whatever you are forwarding to does not support one or the other.

                                          This could be confusing.. if your forwarding - then you do not need to enable dnssec on the forwarder.. Its makes no sense to do so.. Its just going to cause extra traffic in your dns query. If where your forwarding is doing dnssec - the forwarder doesn't matter for any sort of dnssec settings. The resolver your forwarding too either does dnssec or it doesn't

                                          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                                          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                                          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                                          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • jimpJ
                                            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                                            last edited by

                                            Your forwarder can validate DNSSEC for you, provided it supports that function. Assuming you trust the server you are forwarding to.

                                            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                                            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                                            Do not Chat/PM for help!

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