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

    New log type entry?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    45 Posts 5 Posters 1.0k Views 6 Watching
    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.
    • Bob.DigB Offline
      Bob.Dig LAYER 8
      last edited by Bob.Dig

      Lately I see those a lot. Is this an expected log entry with 25.07.1?

      Screenshot 2025-10-20 213848.png
      It is not related to UPnP. And It is not after a restart, no rule has changed.
      Edit: Thinking about it more, it could be related to "Use sticky connections"... does this make sense?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • stephenw10S Online
        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
        last edited by

        Hmm, not really something I'd expect to see. That traffic is simply out of state TCP stuff so it would normally be blocked by the default IPv4 block rule.

        Do you have a custom block rule on that interface?

        Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • Bob.DigB Offline
          Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @stephenw10
          last edited by

          @stephenw10 said in New log type entry?:

          Do you have a custom block rule on that interface?

          I don't. There is no rule at all on that interface.

          tinfoilmattT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • stephenw10S Online
            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
            last edited by

            How old are those logs?

            The most likely think is that the ruleset did change since those were created so it's failing to lookup the rule that triggered it.

            You might be able to see it if you switch the log view to 'raw'.

            Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • Bob.DigB Offline
              Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @stephenw10
              last edited by Bob.Dig

              @stephenw10 They are from the same day, might be the same hour. There is no way, that there was a rule by me. UPnP is disabled.

              That interface is "housing" several gateways but there is no gateway set in that interface config. Outbound NAT is active on that interface.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stephenw10S Online
                stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                last edited by

                Mmm, that doesn't mean it didn't reload in that time. Check the logs. Anything dynamic at all might cause that.

                Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Bob.DigB Offline
                  Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @stephenw10
                  last edited by Bob.Dig

                  @stephenw10 Just triggered it again, no way that there is something happening (I can think of).

                  Oct 21 19:34:13 pfSense filterlog[33132]: 4294967295,,,0,hn2.2166,match,block,in,4,0x0,,56,40119,976,none,6,tcp,424,157.240.0.63,192.168.216.49,
                  Oct 21 19:34:13 pfSense filterlog[33132]: 4294967295,,,0,hn2.2166,match,block,in,4,0x0,,56,56210,976,none,6,tcp,424,157.240.0.63,192.168.216.49,
                  

                  I see those since 25.07 but I think that there are more now.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • stephenw10S Online
                    stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                    last edited by

                    Hmm, you must have something unusual in the ruleset. pfBlocker? Captive Portal perhaps?

                    Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Bob.DigB Offline
                      Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @stephenw10
                      last edited by Bob.Dig

                      @stephenw10 No Captive Portal and no pfBlocker rules on that interface and not updating anyway while I trigger this.

                      Unusual is my usual hardware, Hyper-V. But again, this came with 25.07. I will disable Sticky Connections to see if it makes a difference.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • M Offline
                        marcosm Netgate
                        last edited by marcosm

                        The filter log doesn't show a tracker ID so I would start by going through the loaded ruleset for rules without an ID (pfctl -sr) and see if there's a rule that could match. In some special cases rules without logging enabled can still trigger a log.

                        Bob.DigB 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • Bob.DigB Offline
                          Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @marcosm
                          last edited by

                          @marcosm Didn't see nothing. ^^

                          tinfoilmattT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • Bob.DigB Offline
                            Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @marcosm
                            last edited by

                            @marcosm said in New log type entry?:

                            In some special cases rules without logging enabled can still trigger a log

                            So if I create a block rule with no log and put it on that interface I am good, like with IGMP? Also I could send you the output, it is almost 400 lines though.

                            M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • stephenw10S Online
                              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                              last edited by

                              You can upload it as a txt file here: https://nc.netgate.com/nextcloud/s/D24QzpR5xeMAdFb

                              Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • Bob.DigB Offline
                                Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @stephenw10
                                last edited by Bob.Dig

                                @stephenw10 Done.
                                Looks like having a block rule on that interface is "fixing" it for my eyes. 😉

                                Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • M Offline
                                  marcosm Netgate @Bob.Dig
                                  last edited by

                                  @Bob.Dig Yes, like with IP Options. It could also be useful to get a pcap of the dropped packet.

                                  Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • Bob.DigB Offline
                                    Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @marcosm
                                    last edited by

                                    @marcosm said in New log type entry?:

                                    It could also be useful to get a pcap of the dropped packet.

                                    I will look into this tomorrow and upload it. 192.168.216.49 would be the destination IP and I would capture everything with this IP for some seconds.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • stephenw10S Online
                                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                      last edited by

                                      A pcap on the external side there would see the traffic before the NAT translation so 192.168.216.49 would not be the destination at that point.

                                      Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • Bob.DigB Offline
                                        Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @stephenw10
                                        last edited by

                                        @stephenw10 On which interface should I capture, I thought on that where the log is from.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • stephenw10S Online
                                          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                          last edited by

                                          Yes you should pcap on the external interface but you will need to filter by something else because 192.168.216.49 won't be present on those packets at that point.

                                          Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • Bob.DigB Offline
                                            Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @stephenw10
                                            last edited by Bob.Dig

                                            @stephenw10 said in New log type entry?:

                                            you should pcap on the external interface

                                            I filtered only for TCP. Sry for it being that big but I had no success provoking it with just light traffic... Included is the log entry and some pfctl -sr.
                                            I hope you guys will find the secret rule. 😉

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