Snort 2.9.5.6 pkg v3.0.4 Update – Release notes and change log



  • An update to the Snort package has been posted.  The binary is updated to version 2.9.5.6 and the GUI package to version 3.0.4.  This version introduces three new features and fixes four bugs as described below.

    Installation Notes:  as usual, best results are achieved by removing and then re-installing the Snort package because of the binary version update.  Just be sure to check the box near the bottom of the page on the GLOBAL SETTINGS tab to save Snort settings when uninstalling.  This is especially critical for installs on 2.0.x and older versions of pfSense!

    If you use barnyard2 for logging to a database, you most likely need to perform this task as posted on the Snort.org blog for the barnyard2 v2-1.13 update included in this Snort package upgrade.

    UPGRADE REQUIREMENTS

    If you are upgrading to barnyard2 2-1.13 (build 327) or above from a previous version and using output database.

    You will need to delete every row in your sig_reference table. (DELETE FROM sig_reference;)

    The table will be re-populated at startup, and has no impact on historical data.

    New Features

    • An additional reverse DNS lookup icon has been added to the ALERTS and BLOCKS tab entries. The new icons mimic the functionality available for the firewall logs view on pfSense 2.1 and higher. The new DNS lookup icons are only available on pfSense 2.1 or higher. NOTEFor older pfSense versions, the legacy behavior with the single icon remains.

    • The ALERTS tab now features a "Rule Disable" icon in the SID column alongside the "Add to Suppress List" icon. Clicking the "Rule Disable" icon will force-disable the rule and prevent traffic being evaluated against the rule. Note this will result in the rule being completely removed from the enforcing rule set; as opposed to suppressing the alert, which simply prevents future alerts but the rule still inspects traffic.

    • The Snort GUI now provides the ability to manage all rules including the decoder and preprocessor rules on the RULES tab. Users can force-disable (or force-enable) any rules from the decoder.rules, preprocessor.rules and sensitive-data.rules files. Snort now generates a single enforcing rules file (snort.rules) that contains all the rules including the preprocessor rules that were formerly loaded separately from a different sub-directory. A beneficial side-effect to this is that now the sid-msg.map file is complete and contains the preprocessor rules. This is helpful with third-party logging tools such as Barnyard2 that depend on the sid-msg.map file.

    Bug Fixes

    • A potential bug in the Spoink output plugin used to insert IP blocks in pfSense is fixed. The bug could have resulted in Snort occasionally failing to insert an IP into the block table.

    • When removing a blocked IP address using the X icon beside the alert on the ALERTS tab, the user is not always returned to the same interface selection upon the page reload.

    • When toggling the enable/disable state of a rule on the RULES tab, the rule never toggles back to its default state.

    • When clearing custom rules by manually deleting the content and saving a blank page, the custom rules are not cleared.

    Security Fixes

    • A potential XSS issue is fixed in the View Logs pop-up dialog.

    Bill



  • Like I mentioned in the thread for the previous update, pfSense Package manager still shows the version as 2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4. Other than that the package installed properly and the new version of Snort seems to be up and running.



  • @fragged:

    Like I mentioned in the thread for the previous update, pfSense Package manager still shows the version as 2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4. Other than that the package installed properly and the new version of Snort seems to be up and running.

    Ermal merged the change early this morning (U.S. Eastern Time), but not everything appears sync'd yet.  I will drop him a note.

    Bill



  • Thanks for the Updates, just updated Snort to  2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4 and awaiting the new Snort 2.9.5.6 pkg v3.0.4 to hit the repository!



  • @humps:

    Thanks for the Updates, just updated Snort to  2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4 and awaiting the new Snort 2.9.5.6 pkg v3.0.4 to hit the repository!

    It is there already, the package name is just incorrect on the Package Manager page. You can reinstall the package to get the new binary.



  • @fragged:

    @humps:

    Thanks for the Updates, just updated Snort to  2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4 and awaiting the new Snort 2.9.5.6 pkg v3.0.4 to hit the repository!

    It is there already, the package name is just incorrect on the Package Manager page. You can reinstall the package to get the new binary.

    Yep, this was a particularly difficult merge because of binary dependencies for the old 2.0.x *.tbz packages.  We had to do more than the normal amount of manual edits, and the <version>tag got missed in the package manager XML file.  That will get fixed shortly.

    But the correct binary is posted, so if you install "Snort 2.9.5.5" you will actually get the newest 2.9.5.6 stuff.  As I said, though, give it a little bit and everything should get matched back up.  jimp just posted the fix.

    Bill</version>



  • OK.  Things are finally matched up now, so under System…Packages you should see "Snort 2.9.5.6 pkg v3.0.4".

    Note:  if you installed the earlier package that said "Snort 2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4", then you have the new code but just the wrong marker.  You can safely just reinstall the package to get the correct version number noted in your packages database.

    Bil



  • @bmeeks:

    OK.  Things are finally matched up now, so under System…Packages you should see "Snort 2.9.5.6 pkg v3.0.4".

    Note:  if you installed the earlier package that said "Snort 2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4", then you have the new code but just the wrong marker.  You can safely just reinstall the package to get the correct version number noted in your packages database.

    Bil

    Ok kool..
    I'm gonna keep the version that I have now and watch if I see any new versions over the next day then re-install if necessary

    UPDATE!
    The new package  (Available: 2.9.5.6 pkg v3.0.4 , Installed: 2.9.5.5 pkg v3.0.4)  is now shown in the package manager, I have reinstalled and updated to the new one, will report back if I experience any major issues.

    Thanks Again!



  • The "Installed Packages" dashboard widget correctly showed the update available under the new version and after install the new version is showing.  Thanks Bill!!

    Rick


  • Moderator

    @bmeeks:

    An update to the Snort package has been posted.

    New Features

    Bug Fixes

    Bill

    New Features

    All new features work for me. I think the "Disable Rule" icon should have a prompt asking to continue, as it could be hit by accident.
    The new Setup is very slick. Fantastic work Bill!!  ;D

    Bugs

    1  & 3 - I never had an issue with
    2 & 4 - Fixes worked as expected.  ;D



  • @BBcan17:

    @bmeeks:

    An update to the Snort package has been posted.

    New Features

    Bug Fixes

    Bill

    New Features

    All new features work for me. I think the "Disable Rule" icon should have a prompt asking to continue, as it could be hit by accident.
    The new Setup is very slick. Fantastic work Bill!!  ;D

    Bugs

    1  & 3 - I never had an issue with
    2 & 4 - Fixes worked as expected.  ;D

    Thank you.  You are right, I need to add an "are you sure" dialog for the rule disable icon when clicked.  Will put that in the next update when 2.9.6.0 is posted.  Should be toward the middle or end of March.

    Bill



  • I get this error and Snort does not start:

    snort[36042]: FATAL ERROR: Failed to load /usr/pbi/snort-amd64/lib/snort/dynamicrules/web-misc.so: /usr/pbi/snort-amd64/lib/snort/dynamicrules/web-misc.so: invalid file format

    Edit: the above was after updating a running Snort. I uninstalled and then installed and then it started up without errors.



  • @daniev:

    I get this error and Snort does not start:

    snort[36042]: FATAL ERROR: Failed to load /usr/pbi/snort-amd64/lib/snort/dynamicrules/web-misc.so: /usr/pbi/snort-amd64/lib/snort/dynamicrules/web-misc.so: invalid file format

    Could be a problem with one of the Snort VRT rule updates.  That indicates a Shared Object rule, and those come down precompiled by the Snort VRT in the Snort rules tarball.  For now, disable (uncheck) that rule set on the CATEGORIES tab and see if that will fix the problem.

    I will test in one of my VMs as well.

    UPDATE: I tested this in a VM and could not reproduce the problem.  All of the Snort web-*.so rules loaded fine for me.  Try forcing a new rules download on your end and see if that helps.  Here's how:

    1.  Go to Diagnostics…Edit on the pfSense menu.

    2.  Browse to /usr/pbi/snort-amd64/etc/snort and open the snort rules snapshot MD5 file located there.

    3.  Make any kind of change in the content (for example, just change the last 3 digits to zeros) and save the change.

    4.  Now go to the Rules Update tab and download the rules again.  Altering the content of the MD5 file should force a new set of Snort rules to come down.

    I am using the Snort paid subscriber rules.  If you still have the issue after downloading the rules update again, and you are using the free registered user Oinkcode, you might need to contact the Snort VRT at snort.org and let them know.

    Bill



  • Bill, sorry but before I saw your reply I unchecked the Save configuration option and uninstalled Snort. I re-installed and all is running fine. I have a paid Snort subscription. Thanks!



  • @daniev:

    Bill, sorry but before I saw your reply I unchecked the Save configuration option and uninstalled Snort. I re-installed and all is running fine. I have a paid Snort subscription. Thanks!

    OK.  Glad it worked out for you.  Something in that file must have gotten corrupted during the original download and install.  As I said, that file is actually part of the downloaded rules tarball from snort.org.

    Bill



  • @bmeeks:

    New Features

    • The ALERTS tab now features a "Rule Disable" icon in the SID column alongside the "Add to Suppress List" icon. Clicking the "Rule Disable" icon will force-disable the rule and prevent traffic being evaluated against the rule. Note this will result in the rule being completely removed from the enforcing rule set; as opposed to suppressing the alert, which simply prevents future alerts but the rule still inspects traffic.

    Nice one! Thank you very much for this.
    @bmeeks:

    • The Snort GUI now provides the ability to manage all rules including the decoder and preprocessor rules on the RULES tab. Users can force-disable (or force-enable) any rules from the decoder.rules, preprocessor.rules and sensitive-data.rules files. Snort now generates a single enforcing rules file (snort.rules) that contains all the rules including the preprocessor rules that were formerly loaded separately from a different sub-directory. A beneficial side-effect to this is that now the sid-msg.map file is complete and contains the preprocessor rules. This is helpful with third-party logging tools such as Barnyard2 that depend on the sig-msg.map file.

    Does this mean I can finally get rid of the double decoding attack alert (I thought IIS was banned from industry use by now…)? And does this mean smaller suppress lists? Even less power wasted evaluating useless rules? THANK YOU!!!
    On the downside, I have to post an update to the blueprint now :P



  • @jflsakfja:

    Does this mean I can finally get rid of the double decoding attack alert (I thought IIS was banned from industry use by now…)? And does this mean smaller suppress lists? Even less power wasted evaluating useless rules? THANK YOU!!!
    On the downside, I have to post an update to the blueprint now :P

    Yep.  The user now has total control of the decoder and preprocessor rules via the RULES tab.  Just select them in the drop-down list and disable away as you desire.

    I have a plan for the future to continue improvements with rules management including the ability to use PCREs to selectively enable/disable rules.  In short, I plan to incorporate the functionality of the enablesid.conf, disablesid.conf and/or modifiysid.conf files afforded by PulledPork and Oinkmaster.

    Bill


  • Moderator

    Hi Bill,

    Could you take a look at the attached png file?

    The Alerts page is showing alerts for the "Disabled Rules". Is this normal?

    Would that mean that all of the rules are loaded into memory? Memory is not an issue for me, however, I never noticed that before.

    If this is Normal, than I guess atleast I'm seeing the alerts that are not being blocked?

    ![Alert Page.png](/public/imported_attachments/1/Alert Page.png)
    ![Alert Page.png_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/Alert Page.png_thumb)



  • @BBcan17:

    Hi Bill,

    Could you take a look at the attached png file?

    The Alerts page is showing alerts for the "Disabled Rules". Is this normal?

    Would that mean that all of the rules are loaded into memory? Memory is not an issue for me, however, I never noticed that before.

    If this is Normal, than I guess atleast I'm seeing the alerts that are not being blocked?

    You are probably seeing "history".  The view on the ALERTS tab is simply the first "nnn" records read from the alerts log.  The "nnn" value is the numeric setting on the tab for how many alerts to show.  So the alert should have happened in the past, you disabled the rule, but the original entry is still in the alerts log and will be read and shown in the list.  To see if my theory is correct, reduce the number of alerts to display to something like 3 or 4 and see if the disabled ones disappear.  If not post back.

    The new code should be disabling the rule, performing an enforcing rules file rebuild for the interface, and then doing a "live rule reload" for the interface all when you click the X.  From that point forward, you should get no new alerts from the disabled rule.  But because of the history aspect in the logs as I described above, you might see them listed on the tab (but with the lighter-colored icon to show the rule is disabled).  Depending on how many alerts you get per unit time, and the setting of how many alert log entries to display, the alerts from disabled rules should eventually disappear from the tab.

    Bill


  • Moderator

    @bmeeks:

    You are probably seeing "history".

    So the alert should have happened in the past, you disabled the rule, but the original entry is still in the alerts log and will be read and shown in the list.  To see if my theory is correct, reduce the number of alerts to display to something like 3 or 4 and see if the disabled ones disappear.  If not post back.

    These are fresh events. See attached png files. Those rules have been disabled for a long time now.

    ![Alert Page.png](/public/imported_attachments/1/Alert Page.png)
    ![Alert Page.png_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/Alert Page.png_thumb)
    ![Alert Page 2.png](/public/imported_attachments/1/Alert Page 2.png)
    ![Alert Page 2.png_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/Alert Page 2.png_thumb)



  • @BBcan17:

    @bmeeks:

    You are probably seeing "history".

    So the alert should have happened in the past, you disabled the rule, but the original entry is still in the alerts log and will be read and shown in the list.  To see if my theory is correct, reduce the number of alerts to display to something like 3 or 4 and see if the disabled ones disappear.  If not post back.

    These are fresh events. See attached png files. Those rules have been disabled for a long time now.

    OK, one more question.  Did you try manually restarting Snort after disabling the rule?  That should not be required, but maybe something is not working with live reload.  Also, did you disable the rule from the new ALERTS tab icon or from the RULES tab?  If on the RULES tab, you need to click APPLY after disabling the rule in order for a new rule set to build.

    I will test this in a virtual machine again.  It was working (or at least I thought it was working… :-[).

    Bill


  • Moderator

    Hi Bill,

    I didn't add or remove any rules today. Those rules were disabled months ago.  :(



  • @BBcan17:

    Hi Bill,

    I didn't add or remove any rules today. Those rules were disabled months ago.  :(

    Hmm…OK, one more question.  Look in your config.xml file using Diagnostics…Edit File.  The path to the file is /conf/config.xml.  Scroll down and find all the Snort parameters.  The section title will start with <snortglobal>.  You will see collections of data for each configured interface.  For the interface in question, find the tag element for <rule_sid_off>and look at the values stored there.  You should have pairs of numbers separated colons.  These are the GID:SID values for the rule.  Each GID:SID pair should be delimited by " || " double-pipe symbols.  Let me know if anything other than what I described is in there.

    It's late where I am, so I will test this in a VM tomorrow and see if I goofed it up someplace.

    Bill</rule_sid_off></snortglobal>


  • Moderator

    Hi Bill,

    It looks ok to me…

    Let me know if you want me to send it to you?

    Thanks.



  • Hi,

    I updated the snort package today, but when starting snort with the block option I get the following error:
    "Feb 20 10:09:13 snort[7254]: FATAL ERROR: pf.conf => Table snort2c don't exists in packet filter: No such file or directory"

    I searched the net, and found a previous post about the same issue but for an older version, so the resolution is not the same.
    Can you please tell me how to make this work again? I highly rely on the auto block option as we see a lot of russian botnets trying to attack or scan our servers.

    PS I tried reinstalling the package and uninstalling and installing it again. Although with saving options, as I deselected some of the rules

    Thanks in advance
    K.R.

    Ruben Vanhoutte



  • @VipIT:

    Hi,

    I updated the snort package today, but when starting snort with the block option I get the following error:
    "Feb 20 10:09:13 snort[7254]: FATAL ERROR: pf.conf => Table snort2c don't exists in packet filter: No such file or directory"

    I searched the net, and found a previous post about the same issue but for an older version, so the resolution is not the same.
    Can you please tell me how to make this work again? I highly rely on the auto block option as we see a lot of russian botnets trying to attack or scan our servers.

    PS I tried reinstalling the package and uninstalling and installing it again. Although with saving options, as I deselected some of the rules

    Thanks in advance
    K.R.

    Ruben Vanhoutte

    Whoa!  That is a strange error message.  What version of pfSense are you running?  Seems like maybe an old one?  The <snort2c>alias table it is complaining about is part of the base pfSense install and is not added or removed by the Snort package.  The fact that table is reported as missing seems to indicate maybe you have a very old pfSense version.

    If you have version older than 2.0.x, then I strongly recommend updating.  If you have a version equal to or newer than 2.0.x, then something very bad has happened to the installation and a complete re-install is likely required to fix it.

    Bill</snort2c>



  • Reporting that the rule disable button on the alerts tab works as expected.

    Preprocessor rules are also working as expected. It might be me, or the reduced suppression list but the systems feel faster.

    Over and out :P



  • @jflsakfja:

    Reporting that the rule disable button on the alerts tab works as expected.

    Preprocessor rules are also working as expected. It might be me, or the reduced suppression list but the systems feel faster.

    Over and out :P

    Thanks for the feedback.  I was investigating BBcan17's issue posted above where he said a disabled rule was still firing for him, and was so far I am unable to reproduce.  Your confirmation the rules disable feature is working for you as intended is helpful.

    On the faster front, could be the update to Snort 2.9.5.6 is helping as well.  The Snort VRT folks are still making various "under-the-hood" updates now and then.

    Bill



  • @BBcan17:

    Hi Bill,

    It looks ok to me…

    Let me know if you want me to send it to you?

    Thanks.

    BBcan17:

    Quick question from something I just noticed in your screenshots.  Are you running both Emerging Threats Pro and Emerging Threats Open rules concurrently?  It looks like both have generated an alert from your screenshots, and that really should not be possible.  The GUI is supposed to lock out one when the other is selected (on the GLOBAL SETTINGS tab).  The code is also supposed to remove ET Open rules if you enable ET Pro, and vice versa.

    If you are in fact running both rule sets, then you could very well have duplicate SIDs.  The GUI code is not set up to handle this as that would be an unexpected occurrence based on locking out ET Open when ET Pro is selected, or locking out ET Pro when ET Open is selected.  The disable SID code will basically just find and disable the first occurrence of the SID in the rules array when searching.  So it could be disabling the ET Pro SID for one disabled ET Open rule, and then the ET Open SID for another ET Pro one.  Does what I'm saying make sense?

    Reply back and let me know if you are in fact using both rule sets (and how you managed to enable them if you are).  By the way, the Emerging Threats Pro rules contain all of the ET Open rules and then extra "Pro Rules".  It's the extra Pro rules that you pay for.  My understanding is there is no benefit to running both sets of Emerging Threats rules.

    Bill



  • @bmeeks:

    @VipIT:

    Hi,

    I updated the snort package today, but when starting snort with the block option I get the following error:
    "Feb 20 10:09:13 snort[7254]: FATAL ERROR: pf.conf => Table snort2c don't exists in packet filter: No such file or directory"

    I searched the net, and found a previous post about the same issue but for an older version, so the resolution is not the same.
    Can you please tell me how to make this work again? I highly rely on the auto block option as we see a lot of russian botnets trying to attack or scan our servers.

    PS I tried reinstalling the package and uninstalling and installing it again. Although with saving options, as I deselected some of the rules

    Thanks in advance
    K.R.

    Ruben Vanhoutte

    Whoa!  That is a strange error message.  What version of pfSense are you running?  Seems like maybe an old one?  The <snort2c>alias table it is complaining about is part of the base pfSense install and is not added or removed by the Snort package.  The fact that table is reported as missing seems to indicate maybe you have a very old pfSense version.

    If you have version older than 2.0.x, then I strongly recommend updating.  If you have a version equal to or newer than 2.0.x, then something very bad has happened to the installation and a complete re-install is likely required to fix it.

    Bill</snort2c>

    Hi Bill,

    I solved it. apparently the problem was situated in my aliasses. I had an 'URL table' alias with around 4300 IP addresses that needed to be blocked.
    I noticed that the block rules for that alias wasn't working and all firewall rules were disabled to the point everything was any-any allowed.
    Removing that Alias caused everything to work again. So apparently that single alias with >4000 IP's broke the whole firewall..



  • @VipIT:

    @bmeeks:

    @VipIT:

    Hi,

    I updated the snort package today, but when starting snort with the block option I get the following error:
    "Feb 20 10:09:13 snort[7254]: FATAL ERROR: pf.conf => Table snort2c don't exists in packet filter: No such file or directory"

    I searched the net, and found a previous post about the same issue but for an older version, so the resolution is not the same.
    Can you please tell me how to make this work again? I highly rely on the auto block option as we see a lot of russian botnets trying to attack or scan our servers.

    PS I tried reinstalling the package and uninstalling and installing it again. Although with saving options, as I deselected some of the rules

    Thanks in advance
    K.R.

    Ruben Vanhoutte

    Whoa!  That is a strange error message.  What version of pfSense are you running?  Seems like maybe an old one?  The <snort2c>alias table it is complaining about is part of the base pfSense install and is not added or removed by the Snort package.  The fact that table is reported as missing seems to indicate maybe you have a very old pfSense version.

    If you have version older than 2.0.x, then I strongly recommend updating.  If you have a version equal to or newer than 2.0.x, then something very bad has happened to the installation and a complete re-install is likely required to fix it.

    Bill</snort2c>

    Hi Bill,

    I solved it. apparently the problem was situated in my aliasses. I had an 'URL table' alias with around 4300 IP addresses that needed to be blocked.
    I noticed that the block rules for that alias wasn't working and all firewall rules were disabled to the point everything was any-any allowed.
    Removing that Alias caused everything to work again. So apparently that single alias with >4000 IP's broke the whole firewall..

    Glad you sorted it out.  I think I've seen a few others posting in other sub-forums about problems with large numbers of IPs in alias tables on pfSense.  You could post the issue in the Firewall section of the Support Forum and see if any of the folks in there can help.

    Bill


  • Moderator

    @bmeeks:

    Quick question from something I just noticed in your screenshots.  Are you running both Emerging Threats Pro and Emerging Threats Open rules concurrently?  It looks like both have generated an alert from your screenshots, and that really should not be possible.

    Reply back and let me know if you are in fact using both rule sets (and how you managed to enable them if you are).  By the way, the Emerging Threats Pro rules contain all of the ET Open rules and then extra "Pro Rules".  It's the extra Pro rules that you pay for.  My understanding is there is no benefit to running both sets of Emerging Threats rules.

    Bill

    Hi Bill, I am using VT Pro and Snort VRT (pd).

    I did noticed a few days ago that one of my alias tables (less than 100 ips) duplicated 3 times in the Alias Lists. I had to rename the 2 duplicates and than it allowed me to delete it.

    I also am noticing that one of the rules "ET POLICY curl User-Agent Outbound" which was disabled months ago. Keeps blocking traffic. I have tried to add a suppress but it still blocks any traffic. I've tried to remove the block from the table and restart Snort without success.

    I do notice that the GUI is a lot quicker to respond than previously.




  • @BBcan17:

    I also am noticing that one of the rules "ET POLICY curl User-Agent Outbound" which was disabled months ago. Keeps blocking traffic. I have tried to add a suppress but it still blocks any traffic. I've tried to remove the block from the table and restart Snort without success.

    Just tested (curl ifconfig.me) and the rule did not fire up an alert. Are you sure it's disabled/suppressed?

    EDIT: On a side note, the pcaps in /var/log/snort/$interface don't appear to be timestamped correctly, or certain captures are not logged. I'm looking for a specific capture to investigate an IMAP unknown response and an IMAP unknown command for a client of mine and cannot find it.

    EDIT2: greping the files for the IP shows all the entries in the alert file, but not in other files (snort.log.xxxxxxxxx), so I'm guessing it wasn't logged after all.


  • Moderator

    Hi Bill,

    I have uninstalled the Snort package and re-installed and it looks like its back to normal? I will keep you posted.

    After it was re-installed, while it was enabling the Interfaces in the back ground, i noticed the first alert was from a "Disabled" Rule. but the balance of the alerts since Snort
    was fully enabled on both interfaces are all from "Enabled" Rules only.

    The "ET POLICY curl User-Agent Outbound" rule is also not being blocked since the re-install as per my last post.

    I will have to let it run for a bit to know for sure….  ;)

    Thanks.


  • Moderator

    @jflsakfja:

    Just tested (curl ifconfig.me) and the rule did not fire up an alert. Are you sure it's disabled/suppressed?

    That rule was disabled and the alert was greyed out in the Alerts Tab. I also had it in the suppress.

    Re-Install seems to have fixed it.



  • @BBcan17:

    Hi Bill,

    I have uninstalled the Snort package and re-installed and it looks like its back to normal? I will keep you posted.

    After it was re-installed, while it was enabling the Interfaces in the back ground, i noticed the first alert was from a "Disabled" Rule. but the balance of the alerts since Snort
    was fully enabled on both interfaces are all from "Enabled" Rules only.

    The "ET POLICY curl User-Agent Outbound" rule is also not being blocked since the re-install as per my last post.

    I will have to let it run for a bit to know for sure….  ;)

    Thanks.

    OK.  Sounds like something got sort of messed up at some point.  Glad the reinstall seems to have fixed things for you.  I tested disabling rules this morning, and they do in fact get completely removed from the snort.rules file where all the active rules go.  You will find this file in the interface directory such as /usr/pbi/snort-amd64/etc/snort/snort_xxxxx_em0/rules (where xxxxx is the UUID for the interface).  So if you want to be sure a particular rule is not being used, just grep for it in that file.  If not there, then the running Snort interface with the same UUID can't be using it since it reads the rules to enforce from that file.

    Bill



  • Where can I find the recognized IMAP commands? been searching for a while and couldn't find them in a file. Need to check a packet capture against the known commands to see what's causing the rule to fire an alert.



  • @jflsakfja:

    Where can I find the recognized IMAP commands? been searching for a while and couldn't find them in a file. Need to check a packet capture against the known commands to see what's causing the rule to fire an alert.

    Should be listed in the snort.conf file for the interface.  Assuming a pfSense 2.1 64-bit build, the path would be:

    /usr/pbi/snort-amd64/etc/snort/snort_xxxxx_em0/snort.conf

    Modify the path with "i-386" if a 32-bit machine.  The "xxxx" is a UUID that is unique to each interface, and the "em0" in my example is the physical interface name. It may be different on your hardware.

    For now the SMTP and IMAP commands are not user-editable, and any changes you make manually in the file will be overwritten at the next save of any configuration change or if Snort restarts.

    You can, if you want to, disable the IMAP preprocessor completely on the PREPROCESSORS tab, and then go to the INTERFACE tab for the specific interface and type all the IMAP preprocessor configuration info manually into the Advanced Pass-Through box at the bottom of the page.

    Bill



  • # IMAP preprocessor #
    preprocessor imap: \
    	ports { 143 } \
    	memcap 1310700 \
    	qp_decode_depth 0 \
    	b64_decode_depth 0 \
    	bitenc_decode_depth 0
    
    

    That's the only things included for imap. so are all the imap commands missing?



  • @jflsakfja:

    # IMAP preprocessor #
    preprocessor imap: \
    	ports { 143 } \
    	memcap 1310700 \
    	qp_decode_depth 0 \
    	b64_decode_depth 0 \
    	bitenc_decode_depth 0
    
    

    That's the only things included for imap. so are all the imap commands missing?

    Yeah, that's what is used in the configuration.  I tried to mimic what is in the default snort.conf included in the source tarball, but I don't remember specifically if I looked into the IMAP preprocessor in much detail.  If you have some suggested content for that or the other preprocessors, put it together and send to me in a PM (or post it here).  I will try to incorporate it into a subsequent release.  Just remember to stay sort of general in nature remembering that the goal is for Snort to work for the majority of users with the out-of-the-box settings.

    Bill


Log in to reply