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

    Chrony, PTP, Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd)

    General pfSense Questions
    14
    136
    32.1k
    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.
    • Sergei_ShablovskyS
      Sergei_Shablovsky
      last edited by Sergei_Shablovsky

      Generally speaking, better to have time synchronized in all network below pfSense. Especially that is important for nowaday's business.
      So, having NTP server (with appropriate fw/routing rules for internal network) on pfSense are standard for each serious SysAdmin at last 8+ years.

      But time changes and Network Time Security (NTS) come to replace old, outdated, unsecured NTP. (If You not familiar with topic, please read this as start point).

      What is Your opinion about asking the NetGate to replace outdated and unsecured NTP by NTS (because NTPsec already are in FreeBSD ports, have a lot of installations, and no serious bugs or vulnerabilities) ?

      —
      CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
      Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
      (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

      johnpozJ bingo600B DaddyGoD 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • johnpozJ
        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @Sergei_Shablovsky
        last edited by

        @sergei_shablovsky You could ask them ;)

        I run ntpsec on my stratum 1 timeserver..

        pi@ntp:~ $ ntpq -V
        ntpq ntpsec-1.2.1+20-gcb9d08ca5
        pi@ntp:~ $ 
        

        Pfsense just points to it for time..

        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 2.7.2, 24.11

        Sergei_ShablovskyS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • Sergei_ShablovskyS
          Sergei_Shablovsky @johnpoz
          last edited by

          @johnpoz said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

          @sergei_shablovsky You could ask them ;)

          The answer all time dependent on “how much people’s really need this” ;) Because of this I asking here

          I run ntpsec on my stratum 1 timeserver..

          pi@ntp:~ $ ntpq -V
          ntpq ntpsec-1.2.1+20-gcb9d08ca5
          pi@ntp:~ $ 
          

          Pfsense just points to it for time..

          You have separate machine especially for timeserver?

          —
          CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
          Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
          (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

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

            @sergei_shablovsky said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

            You have separate machine especially for timeserver?

            Yeah I have a raspberry pi with a gps hat that I use as my networks stratum 1 server, and also serve this up to the ntp pool via both ipv4 and IPv6 ;)

            pool.jpg
            ntp.jpg

            ntp is a hobby of mine ;) There are a few people on the forums that run ntp for "fun" hehehe

            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 2.7.2, 24.11

            Sergei_ShablovskyS 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • Sergei_ShablovskyS
              Sergei_Shablovsky @johnpoz
              last edited by Sergei_Shablovsky

              @johnpoz said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

              @sergei_shablovsky said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

              You have separate machine especially for timeserver?

              Yeah I have a raspberry pi with a gps hat that I use as my networks stratum 1 server, and also serve this up to the ntp pool via both ipv4 and IPv6 ;)

              pool.jpg

              Good solution, but we need something more serious, 2 PSU, robust working, etc...
              Because separate rack server is too much energy consuming, and become another one point of failure, we decide just to attach GPS receiver directly to COM1 on back of pfSense server (we have another one on front panel of server already).

              I just asking this topic due recently we bought for one of projects new Garmin GPS 16x-HVS (more robust and stable working, and same or better receiver sensitivity rather 19x-HVS, especially for non-moving objects like rack server).

              ntp is a hobby of mine ;)

              Glad to read this. Many years ago (early 2000’) I also play with it. Heh!

              There are a few people on the forums that run ntp for "fun" hehehe

              For us NTP is not fun ;) Just a part of serious work and obligations.

              —
              CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
              Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
              (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

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

                @sergei_shablovsky said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                For us NTP is not fun ;) Just a part of serious work and obligations.

                In a work setup - we always ran commercial NTP servers.. I use to manage those back in the day, before I moved to a different department..

                Those are not all that cheap ;) But when you have global network and 1000's of devices and clients - no you don't fire up a pi with a gps hat ;) heheh

                If I recall some of them were from https://www.meinbergglobal.com

                We had a few different ones around the globe.

                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 2.7.2, 24.11

                Sergei_ShablovskyS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                • Sergei_ShablovskyS
                  Sergei_Shablovsky @johnpoz
                  last edited by

                  @johnpoz said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                  @sergei_shablovsky said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                  You have separate machine especially for timeserver?

                  Yeah I have a raspberry pi with a gps hat that I use as my networks stratum 1 server, and also serve this up to the ntp pool via both ipv4 and IPv6 ;)

                  Which GPS receiver are a You using?
                  And is it COM or USB connected?

                  —
                  CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
                  Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
                  (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

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

                    @sergei_shablovsky its a hat! plugs onto the pi - give me a sec and look it up.

                    this is the one using
                    https://store.uputronics.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=81

                    HAB-GPSPI-NAN

                    Wow just looked up my order, back in early 2016.. Still going strong ;)

                    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 2.7.2, 24.11

                    Q 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                    • Q
                      q54e3w @johnpoz
                      last edited by

                      I'd rather have PTP personally.

                      Sergei_ShablovskyS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • bingo600B
                        bingo600 @Sergei_Shablovsky
                        last edited by bingo600

                        @sergei_shablovsky
                        IMHO pfSense should continue using the "Industri standard" NTP, that is installed on thousands of servers around the world.

                        If you need ntpsec, do as @johnpoz
                        Make a dedicated NTP server facing public, with ntpsec , and point your internal servers to the ntpsec box.

                        If i was to change from NTP, to something "Brand new". I would prob. consider Chrony instead.

                        Or maybe even look at Ntimed (which i suppose have excellent FreeBSD support , since PHK has been digging deep into it) , it just seems a bit immature.
                        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8781435

                        /Bingo

                        If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a 👍 - "thumbs up"

                        pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

                        QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
                        CPU  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
                        LAN  : 4 x Intel 211, Disk  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

                        M Sergei_ShablovskyS 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 2
                        • M
                          mer @bingo600
                          last edited by

                          @bingo600
                          All good suggestions. It's always different thinking "serving NTP" or "I'm a NTP client". Different mindsets, especially if you are making the server available to the general public.

                          ntimed: here's the pkg-descr from the port:

                          This is a preview/early-acces/alpha/buzzword-of-the-times release of a
                          new FOSS project written to gradually take over the world of networked
                          timekeeping.

                          No secret on their goal, is there? :)

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • Sergei_ShablovskyS
                            Sergei_Shablovsky @johnpoz
                            last edited by Sergei_Shablovsky

                            @johnpoz said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                            @sergei_shablovsky said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                            For us NTP is not fun ;) Just a part of serious work and obligations.

                            In a work setup - we always ran commercial NTP servers.. I use to manage those back in the day, before I moved to a different department..

                            Those are not all that cheap ;) But when you have global network and 1000's of devices and clients - no you don't fire up a pi with a gps hat ;) heheh

                            Totally agree with a You. Sorry, not mention to confuse You. ;)

                            If I recall some of them were from https://www.meinbergglobal.com

                            We had a few different ones around the globe.

                            Really great hardware, I know this brand: VERY robust and reputable. But as any big brand, sometime a little bit sticky to old NTP implementation and not so fast providing fresh firmware updates...

                            Thanks You again one time for suggestions. I hope this would be helpful for big amount of professionals here.

                            —
                            CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
                            Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
                            (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • Sergei_ShablovskyS
                              Sergei_Shablovsky @q54e3w
                              last edited by Sergei_Shablovsky

                              @q54e3w said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                              I'd rather have PTP personally.
                              **

                              Whenever PTP positioned as “instead of millisecond-level synchronization, PTP networks aim to achieve nanosecond- or even picosecond-level synchronization”, I am not agree that “hardware timestamping“ in PTP on non-special server are much better than NTP/NTS, because “hardware timestamping” in this case based on CPU master clocking. But this is not accurate because BIOS/UEFI CPU/RAM settings, I mean threads, buffers, etc...

                              Generally saying, You are right and I agree with You in case of using separate HARDWARE time-clocking-specialed device (like we see several replies above, 1U rack solution or standalone device with a bunch connectors for GPS/GSM/radio antennas, to receive synchro signals from different sources).

                              If Your server have no directly attached time-source device, any time sync thru ordinary fiber or Eth would have the same disadvantages.
                              (If I loose something, just correct me, please)

                              But in this topic I’l try to discuss on scheme “pfSense on server + GPS receiver (or any other time-source device) + Time Protocol”. No matter, for inside networks behind pfSense, or serving NTP for outside users.

                              —
                              CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
                              Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
                              (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • Sergei_ShablovskyS
                                Sergei_Shablovsky @bingo600
                                last edited by Sergei_Shablovsky

                                @bingo600 said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                                Thank You for opinion!

                                @sergei_shablovsky
                                IMHO pfSense should continue using the "Industri standard" NTP, that is installed on thousands of servers around the world.

                                But this is really old, outdated, and vulnerable solution. Agree?

                                If you need ntpsec, do as @johnpoz
                                Make a dedicated NTP server facing public, with ntpsec , and point your internal servers to the ntpsec box.

                                As I wrote before, in case using non-specialized time-source device, like a just another one server, we receive some disadvantages:

                                • power consuming;
                                • several additional rules for pfSense for internal networks;
                                • several additional rules for pfSense for NTP users outside;
                                • another one (+1) point of failure; (for example if You have two(2) pfSense+GPS on COM port in HA-scheme, Your NTP service also protected, otherwise a You need two(2) dedicated NTP servers and synchronization between them...)

                                If i was to change from NTP, to something "Brand new". I would prob. consider Chrony instead.

                                Or maybe even look at Ntimed (which i suppose have excellent FreeBSD support , since PHK has been digging deep into it) , it just seems a bit immature.
                                https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8781435

                                /Bingo

                                Generally say, in IT I am “conservative”” in mind, so rarely try to using “all newest”. ;) This topic I start about really outdated and vulnerable NTP need to be replaced. And mine proposition are NTPsec.

                                Please, describe in short about advantages Chrony & Ntimed against NTP and NTPsec. Thank You for Your time!

                                —
                                CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
                                Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
                                (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

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

                                  @sergei_shablovsky said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                                  **really outdated and vulnerable NTP”” need to be replaced.

                                  What specific vulnerability are you talking about.. Just because NTP has been around long time - does not mean its not been kept up to date for security issues.

                                  While current version is a year so old 4.2.8p15, I wouldn't call it outdated..

                                  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 2.7.2, 24.11

                                  M Sergei_ShablovskyS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                  • M
                                    mer @johnpoz
                                    last edited by

                                    @johnpoz My understanding of current NTPD is there is a lot of security stuff that can be used/implmented but "it's not the default".

                                    if defaults were changed to be tighter, then new deployments (maybe upgrades) would be tighter but existing ones would need manual changes.

                                    That argument I think applies to ntpsec: new deployments are affected but existing ones aren't.

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

                                      @mer said in Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace unsecure/old NTP (ntpd):

                                      "it's not the default".

                                      Well that is on the runner of the software.. Are you saying there should be something changed in default settings of ntp server on pfsense?

                                      I wouldn't in a million years provide such a service off my firewall to the public internet, ntp on pfsense is meant for ntp server for your local network.

                                      And if I was going to provide it as public service - I would make sure I go through its config, etc. To make sure nothing stupid is in there ;)

                                      edit: There was a thread around here somewhere someone asking about NTPv3 auth - rfc 1305, which you can do with pfsense ntp.. I don't think it was that long ago.. I personally don't get the need to be honest. While sure I could see wanting to make sure your talking to a specific ntp server externally.. Just run your own internal ntp - and not have to worry about any of that.. Not really seeing the need for any sort of ntp security on my own local secure network. If you ask me - just something else that could break ;) For very little security benefit..

                                      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 2.7.2, 24.11

                                      M bingo600B 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                      • M
                                        mer @johnpoz
                                        last edited by

                                        @johnpoz I agree 100% with you. A lot of discussions around services like this seem to devolve to "the defaults aren't good/secure enough and should change".
                                        50% take that stance the other 50% say "If you are standing something up you need to go through the defaults first".

                                        Kind of like "what editor should be the default, vi or ee"

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

                                          @mer agree.. If your not a fan of the defaults - change them.. Defaults are almost always what they are to minimize chance of it not working.. What is the most basic config I can put in - that pretty much a given it will "work". That is the default..

                                          Nobody says that default working config = secure ;)

                                          While I agree as something like pfsense matures and stuff its using evolves - defaults change, and old non secure stuff can drop off. I do recall not that long ago some issues people were having because the changed and dropped off some ssh ciphers from the default config - which broke some users access via their ssh clients, because their clients were out dated, etc.

                                          Default broke shit ;) heheh atleast from the users point of view.. I don't see pretty much anything be it ntp, ssh, web being locked down to tightest mos secure best practice from a security point of view for defaults.. Because its less likely to just work out of the box - which when it doesn't work out of the box, users not happy ;)

                                          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 2.7.2, 24.11

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • bingo600B
                                            bingo600 @johnpoz
                                            last edited by

                                            @johnpoz said in [Network Time Security (NTS, NTPsec) to replace

                                            I wouldn't in a million years provide such a service off my firewall to the public internet, ntp on pfsense is meant for ntp server for your local network.

                                            I totally agree here.
                                            When i worked w. PIX/ASA , there was a sntp client , no NTP service.

                                            In fact NTP service prob. doesn't belong on a firewall , just a sync client. pointing to an inside NTP server.

                                            And if I was going to provide it as public service - I would make sure I go through its config, etc. To make sure nothing stupid is in there ;)

                                            The last OOPZ i know about in NTPD was the amplification attack,
                                            and that is easily avoided in the setup today.

                                            And i agree with : What security issues needs to be fixed in NTP right now ?

                                            /Bingo

                                            If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a 👍 - "thumbs up"

                                            pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

                                            QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
                                            CPU  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
                                            LAN  : 4 x Intel 211, Disk  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

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