Packages wishlist?
-
Hello everyone, is there an opportunity to install package Virtual Box ? With web management as implemented in Nas4free. In the photo example of management virtual box on Nas4free
-
Virtual Box
No.
This is your firewall, not a hypervisor.
However, you can install a virtual pfSense on a hypervisor. -
@hongkonger:
Would really love an implementation of either of the following
- Freenas
- Bacula Server
- Simple FTP server for file storage
- Samba (with UI)
Most of the above are already available in some adhoc way on pfsense (except bacula server and Freenas) , but really appreciate a UI based installation and management.
thanks
I second this. A FTP Server and Samba in particular. If a store bought consumer router can do it, why not pfsense? Surely it can do it better, more secure, and faster. :)
-
If a store bought consumer router can do it, why not pfsense?
Maybe because pfSense is a more serious contender in the firewall business and not one of the flaky consumer routers you better throw as far as your aching back lets you?
-
If a store bought consumer router can do it, why not pfsense?
Maybe because pfSense is a more serious contender in the firewall business and not one of the flaky consumer routers you better throw as far as your aching back lets you?
http://thehackernews.com/2017/05/samba-rce-exploit.html
https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-announce/2017/000406.html
https://www.shodan.io/report/FoqqpNmw -
If a store bought consumer router can do it, why not pfsense?
Maybe because pfSense is a more serious contender in the firewall business and not one of the flaky consumer routers you better throw as far as your aching back lets you?
Really? it's been a stellar firewall so far. it will more than happily block things but I have to fight it to allow things. can't even forward port 80 that worked fine on the tp-link it replaced and also worked on a VM behind the main pfsense router. the data usage stats are practically useless without an added package. So far, ddwrt worked better and wasn't so annoying. I might enjoy pfsense more if it wasn't so featureless. All I'm asking is a couple programs to make it a bit more useful on the LAN side. Also, is it too much to ask for some critical software patches around here? I've got 4 vulnerable packages in 2.3.3 and my only hope is to wait for 2.4. whenever that'll be released. >.>
http://thehackernews.com/2017/05/samba-rce-exploit.html
https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-announce/2017/000406.html
https://www.shodan.io/report/FoqqpNmwI'm aware of that. I'm not dumb enough to put samba or ftp on the wan. I just want it for the lan.
-
is it too much to ask for some critical software patches around here?
If you need the feature and know how to configure it under console/config files, you can enable freebsd repo and install the packages you need.
Also, pfSense has a great GUI framework that you can use to create your own packages with xml files and php script to check selected options and create config files.
What packages from 2.3.3 are vulnerable?
-
Also, is it too much to ask for some critical software patches around here? I've got 4 vulnerable packages in 2.3.3 and my only hope is to wait for 2.4.
What packages? And is there a reason that you haven't installed the 2.3.4 update?
-
Given that the freeradius2 port is expiring the end of June 2017 (this month) I'd be interested in seeing freeradius3 make it in to PFSense
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius2
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius3 -
Given that the freeradius2 port is expiring the end of June 2017 (this month) I'd be interested in seeing freeradius3 make it in to PFSense
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius2
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius3That's been on my to-do list for a while. It's just a lot of work, having to go through and rearrange everything to the 3.x directory layout and changes in the config.
-
I have no experience writing PFSense packages but I'd be willing to contribute.
Given that the freeradius2 port is expiring the end of June 2017 (this month) I'd be interested in seeing freeradius3 make it in to PFSense
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius2
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius3That's been on my to-do list for a while. It's just a lot of work, having to go through and rearrange everything to the 3.x directory layout and changes in the config.
-
-
I have no experience writing PFSense packages but I'd be willing to contribute.
Given that the freeradius2 port is expiring the end of June 2017 (this month) I'd be interested in seeing freeradius3 make it in to PFSense
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius2
https://www.freshports.org/net/freeradius3That's been on my to-do list for a while. It's just a lot of work, having to go through and rearrange everything to the 3.x directory layout and changes in the config.
FreeRADIUS 3 package is available on 2.4 snapshots for testing now, try it out and post feedback here: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=131883.0
-
Virtual Box
No.
This is your firewall, not a hypervisor.
However, you can install a virtual pfSense on a hypervisor.Well, this reminds me about the old joke about a catholic and a protestant priest: The former starts to smoke his pipe while reading the prayerbook, when the latter interrupts him and asks: "Excuse me, I don't want to be nosy, but I asked my bishop if it's OK to smoke while praying, and he answered me, I should not be distracted from paying through smoking. What's the catholic's stance on this matter?"
To which the catholic priest answers: "Very interesting! See, I asked my bishop if it's OK to pray while smoking, and he answered, it's always OK to pray."So, of course, a firewall isn't a hypervisor. But assume you have a server box at a colocation provider, you pay per rack space. So, you can either just run the server protected only by whatever mediocre protection the host OS allows for, or you run pfSense and run the server in VirtualBox within. So, you see, this is all a matter of perspective.
Having a hypervisor box, that runs both pfSense and the server OS is theoretically possible, but much harder to administer, and it requires rather expensive, bare-metal hypervisor software, while pfSense community edition and VirtualBox are both available free for people running small services on a limited budget.
In my case, I have somewhere a pfSense unit at a colo provider, to allow me some specialized VPN type applications. The system is, in terms of CPU power, underutilized, because it's rather low traffic. With the coming requirements for pfSense, I'll have to upgrade to an even more powerful CPU. Needless to say, running a web server or some other small services on the same box would not be undesirable, given that I already pay for the rackspace. vhost has gone the way of the dodo, so VirtualBox would get a lot more utility out of the whole thing, without in any significant way affecting security negatively.
pfSense is useful for a whole lot more than just a plain vanilla firewall; if it's just the latter I'd need, I could use a much simpler system…
-
Hi
it would be nice to have:
- bacula client
- icinga2 client (yes I know there is nrpe)
Greetz
-
Hi all,
it would be great to get Ufdbguard as a package for Pfsense.
Is there a way I can contribute / facilate with that request?Regards
-
Hi!
I'd Love to have the Ocsinventory-Unix-Agent package available, so I could install it and keep my firewall inventoried with the rest of my computers and servers.
-
How about the latest ntopng package?..:)
-
PassiveDNS
Something like this: https://github.com/gamelinux/passivedns
I find the idea so simple, the potential quite big.
-
ZNC for 2.4.X
