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

More details than bandwidthd?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
17 Posts 5 Posters 1.5k 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.
  • L
    lewis
    last edited by Feb 5, 2021, 3:56 PM

    Thanks, I'm checking out ntopng.
    The only odd thing is that the package installer installed a certain version but the ntop page keeps telling me there is an update but I don't see any way to update.

    L 1 Reply Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 4:03 PM Reply Quote 0
    • L
      lewis @lewis
      last edited by lewis Feb 5, 2021, 4:04 PM Feb 5, 2021, 4:03 PM

      @lewis I am now reading that ntpng has serious security issues? Is this true and if so, why is it available as a package on pfsense without such a warning?

      - net-analyzer/ntopng-4.0::gentoo (masked by: package.mask, ~amd64 keyword)
      /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask:
      # Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> (2020-07-20)
      # Serious security vulnerabilities, including
      # remote code execution. Upstream have not yet
      # made a stable release in response to numerous
      # CVEs. Applying patches is not a workable
      # solution for now because of the fragility
      # of reverse dependencies.
      # Indefinitely masking until we have a solution
      # for this.
      # bug #719084
      # Furthermore, ntopng ebuilds depending directly on dev-lang/lua{,jit}
      # must be migrated to lua eclasses before unmasking (bug #752777).
      
      N J 2 Replies Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 4:15 PM Reply Quote 0
      • N
        NogBadTheBad @lewis
        last edited by Feb 5, 2021, 4:15 PM

        @lewis pfSense isn't even using ntopng4.0, its 3.8.

        Andy

        1 x Netgate SG-4860 - 3 x Linksys LGS308P - 1 x Aruba InstantOn AP22

        L 1 Reply Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 4:26 PM Reply Quote 0
        • J
          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @lewis
          last edited by johnpoz Feb 5, 2021, 4:29 PM Feb 5, 2021, 4:19 PM

          Not to make light of issues, especially remote code execution.. but If running this correctly on your network.

          How would anyone other than admin, your management vlan have any possible way to talk to the service to do a remote code anything.

          Now if your saying someone on a network that is being monitored.. Could send some traffic that would exploit ntop in such a way to do something.. Then yeah that would be a serious concern.

          But sometimes you need to look into how such issues can actually be exploited.. If you have to have admin rights already, or be on the management vlan to exploit it.. While sure they need to be taken into account, and should be fixed. On a properly ran network, they should not be of such a concern that you don't run the application - when it provides you something you want/need to be able to do.

          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
          • L
            lewis @NogBadTheBad
            last edited by lewis Feb 5, 2021, 4:27 PM Feb 5, 2021, 4:26 PM

            @nogbadthebad said in More details than bandwidthd?:

            @lewis pfSense isn't even using ntopng4.0, its 3.8.

            Yes, I do see an update in the packages installed now. I've used that but it is still showing 3.8 in the dashboard of ntopng.

            Is the new version more secure based on what I posted?

            In terms of access, I have to remotely access the firewall so using it is not from the LAN side.

            L 1 Reply Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 4:28 PM Reply Quote 0
            • L
              lewis @lewis
              last edited by Feb 5, 2021, 4:28 PM

              After the update, the package manager now shows 0.8.13_8. Totally confused.

              J 1 Reply Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 4:30 PM Reply Quote 0
              • J
                johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @lewis
                last edited by johnpoz Feb 5, 2021, 4:31 PM Feb 5, 2021, 4:30 PM

                Those are the version numbers of the "packages" for pfsense - not the version of the software being used in the package.

                pkg.png

                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 1 Reply Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 4:37 PM Reply Quote 0
                • L
                  lewis @johnpoz
                  last edited by Feb 5, 2021, 4:37 PM

                  @johnpoz
                  Yes, I noticed that after I posted. It seems there is no way to get to 4.x so the question is, based on what I posted, is this package safe?

                  J 1 Reply Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 5:02 PM Reply Quote 0
                  • J
                    johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @lewis
                    last edited by Feb 5, 2021, 5:02 PM

                    That call is yours.. There are thousands of thousands of install running it of that I am sure..

                    If it was of serious concern, I would assume it would be patched, or pulled or atleast a serious warning, etc.

                    Again see my above posts about who can access what when it comes to exploitable things.. Are you worried about some issue with exploit if the person has to be at the console logged in as root to exploit it ;)

                    Same goes with any other exploitable issue - what is the complexity of actually pulling off the exploit.. Example - lets say that there is some serious exploit to ssh.. And anyone that can ssh to X, can get root access.. While this is a concern sure if you have ssh open to the internet. Is it a concern if the only one that can talk to ssh is IP abc, who is the root admin of the box in the first place.. And that IP is local, and the PC is in a locked room ;)

                    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 1 Reply Last reply Feb 5, 2021, 5:11 PM Reply Quote 0
                    • L
                      lewis @johnpoz
                      last edited by Feb 5, 2021, 5:11 PM

                      I have no lack of understanding what the issues could be but that wasn't the question :). Either way, I appreciate all that input and I'm sure it will help the next person that finds this.

                      In the meantime, I'm going to use it.

                      Thanks.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      17 out of 17
                      • First post
                        17/17
                        Last post
                      Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
                        This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
                        consent.not_received