PfBlockerNG

Brutos

@Brutos:

Can someone advice how i can exclude these destination domains please. I have tried the advance rule outbound invert but when i do it locks me out of the firewall interface.

If an IP is getting blocked, then you can either: 1) Suppress the IP from the Alerts Tab 2) Create a new pfBlockerNG alias (Whitelist), and add the IP to the customlist and set the format to "Permit Outbound". Ensure that the "Rule Order" places the Permit Rules, above the Block/Reject Rules.

If a domain is getting blocked by DNSBL, then you need to suppress it from the Alerts Tab.

Thanks I will try that. :)

Jamerson

after i installed this package on a new installation, a error has pop up
Filter Reload
• There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:20: cannot define table bogonsv6: Cannot allocate memory - The line in question reads [20]: table <bogonsv6> persist file "/etc/bogonsv6" @ 2016-06-11 23:56:52
any suggestions what its might be ?

BBcan177

@Jamerson:

after i installed this package on a new installation, a error has pop up
Filter Reload
• There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:20: cannot define table bogonsv6: Cannot allocate memory - The line in question reads [20]: table <bogonsv6> persist file "/etc/bogonsv6" @ 2016-06-11 23:56:52
any suggestions what its might be ?

The bogons is handled by the pfSense code not pfBlockerNG. Maybe try to disable and re-enable Bogons to see what that does. The package changes the max table entry in the advanced settings automatically so it shouldn't be that.

Jamerson

@BBcan177:

@Jamerson:

after i installed this package on a new installation, a error has pop up
Filter Reload
• There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:20: cannot define table bogonsv6: Cannot allocate memory - The line in question reads [20]: table <bogonsv6> persist file "/etc/bogonsv6" @ 2016-06-11 23:56:52
any suggestions what its might be ?

The bogons is handled by the pfSense code not pfBlockerNG. Maybe try to disable and re-enable Bogons to see what that does. The package changes the max table entry in the advanced settings automatically so it shouldn't be that.

will do it and report back,
can i filter the internet with this package ?
block adult websites ? porn ?
does the package wordt with squad guard and squid 3 ?

blueduckdock

@BBcan177:

@Brutos:

Can someone advice how i can exclude these destination domains please. I have tried the advance rule outbound invert but when i do it locks me out of the firewall interface.

If an IP is getting blocked, then you can either: 1) Suppress the IP from the Alerts Tab 2) Create a new pfBlockerNG alias (Whitelist), and add the IP to the customlist and set the format to "Permit Outbound". Ensure that the "Rule Order" places the Permit Rules, above the Block/Reject Rules.

If a domain is getting blocked by DNSBL, then you need to suppress it from the Alerts Tab.

BBCan- first off, great work. Been using pfblocker for a bit and love it (one of my favorite packages on pfsense.) Second- trying to suppress an internal IP (ie. 192.168.1.xxx). I do not have ANY + sign in the alerts tab to add it to the suppression list. As far as I understand, you can add NATted local IPs to the list right? Even when I modify the alias directly and reload, pfblocker continues to block the packets.

For reference, I am blocking LAN outbound to certain countries and some on WAN too perhaps (not at the box to check.) But regardless, it just seems like my box is not working as it should. I'm running 2.3.1-p5 but I DID upgrade from 2.2.6 with pfblocker still installed (I stupidly didn't uninstall before the big upgrade.)

Any ideas?

BBcan177

@blueduckdock:

Trying to suppress an internal IP (ie. 192.168.1.xxx).

I do not have ANY + sign in the alerts tab to add it to the suppression list. As far as I understand, you can add NATted local IPs to the list right? Even when I modify the alias directly and reload, pfblocker continues to block the packets.

You don't suppress Internal IPs.. Suppression is for External IPs and the Suppression Icon is only visible when "suppression" is enabled, and when the External IP is a /32 or /24. Also it won't suppress for Country Blocking…

To have some internal IPs excluded from the Block Rules… Best to use the "Adv. Inbound/Outbound" Rule settings.

blueduckdock

@BBcan177:

@blueduckdock:

Trying to suppress an internal IP (ie. 192.168.1.xxx).

I do not have ANY + sign in the alerts tab to add it to the suppression list. As far as I understand, you can add NATted local IPs to the list right? Even when I modify the alias directly and reload, pfblocker continues to block the packets.

You don't suppress Internal IPs.. Suppression is for External IPs and the Suppression Icon is only visible when "suppression" is enabled, and when the External IP is a /32 or /24. Also it won't suppress for Country Blocking…

To have some internal IPs excluded from the Block Rules… Best to use the "Adv. Inbound/Outbound" Rule settings.

Sounds good. Part of me thought that I'd have to adjust the rules and couldn't use the suppression but I figured I'd try.
Thanks again mate.

gerry

pfsense 2.2.6
I use the country lists to pretty much block anything outside of US/CA
I then have a whitelist set up for any exceptions
I am pretty sure that in the past this worked fine.
At some point the whitelist stopped having any effect.
The firewall rules order also seems incorrect in that the whitelist follows the pfb block lists
After poking around in the settings I found that setting the Rule Order to :
pfB_Pass/Match|pfB_Block/Reject|pfSense_Pass/Match
seems to get things working correctly - and the rules are now ordered as expected with the pass rule above the block rules.
Did something change that requires using this rule order rather than the default to get whitelists to work ?
I would have thought that this and the default would have been the same thing as far as whitelisting goes.
Although this works I am concerned that this may have unforeseen consequences.

BBcan177

@gerry:

pfsense 2.2.6
I use the country lists to pretty much block anything outside of US/CA

Keep in mind that you could also just "Permit" the Countries that you want instead of blocking the world…

I am pretty sure that in the past this worked fine.
At some point the whitelist stopped having any effect.
The firewall rules order also seems incorrect in that the whitelist follows the pfb block lists
After poking around in the settings I found that setting the Rule Order to :
pfB_Pass/Match|pfB_Block/Reject|pfSense_Pass/Match
seems to get things working correctly - and the rules are now ordered as expected with the pass rule above the block rules.
Did something change that requires using this rule order rather than the default to get whitelists to work ?
I would have thought that this and the default would have been the same thing as far as whitelisting goes.
Although this works I am concerned that this may have unforeseen consequences.

Nothing has changed in that part of the code for awhile…

Pippin

Having a problem getting Bambenek "C2 All Indicator Feed" going.
I have tried to put it in DNSBL but get this in log when update:


[ dnsc2allindicatorbambenek ] Downloading update  .. 200 OK
 No Domains Found

Any ideas?

BBcan177

@Pippin:

Having a problem getting Bambenek "C2 All Indicator Feed" going.
I have tried to put it in DNSBL but get this in log when update:
[ dnsc2allindicatorbambenek ] Downloading update  .. 200 OK
 No Domains Found

DNSBL
https://osint.bambenekconsulting.com/feeds/dga-feed.gz
https://osint.bambenekconsulting.com/feeds/c2-dommasterlist.txt

IP
https://osint.bambenekconsulting.com/feeds/c2-ipmasterlist.txt

Pippin

Thanks, those I use without problem, only for dga-feed.gz I have dga-feed.txt.

The one that gives No Domains Found is:
http://osint.bambenekconsulting.com/feeds/c2-masterlist.txt

Or is it not suitable for pfB?
In text editor I see it`s different format then the rest.

BBcan177

@Pippin:

Thanks, those I use without problem, only for dga-feed.gz I have dga-feed.txt.

The one that gives No Domains Found is:
http://osint.bambenekconsulting.com/feeds/c2-masterlist.txt

Or is it not suitable for pfB?
In text editor I see it`s different format then the rest.

It seems like that Feed is a mix of IPs and Domains…

The DNSBL parser is expecting the CSV line to be in a specific format. As you can see from your text editor, the CSV format is different between the two lists...

I would rather not add another function to the DNSBL parser as its just more overhead to go thru for all the other CSV formatted lists. The feeds that I listed above will work just fine as is...

I also recommend to use the .GZ feed, as that will save both BBC and yourself some bandwidth...

Pippin

Ok thanks, will adjust the feed to gz.

I would rather not add another function to the DNSBL parser as its just more overhead to go thru for all the other CSV formatted lists

Ok but thanks for working on this, very nice.

Another thing, I forgot.
In another feed is 127.0.0.1 listed and does not seem to work well with Squid.
Removing the line manually solves it, I should contact them?

ipv4sqblock.jpg_thumb

BBcan177

@Pippin:

Ok thanks, will adjust the feed to gz.

I would rather not add another function to the DNSBL parser as its just more overhead to go thru for all the other CSV formatted lists

Ok but thanks for working on this, very nice.

Another thing, I forgot.
In another feed is 127.0.0.1 listed and does not seem to work well with Squid.
Removing the line manually solves it, I should contact them?

Yes some feeds add RFC1918, and loopback addresses occassionaly… I've even seen 0.0.0.0 which is disasterous ;)

In the case of Firehol, that site updates those feeds once per day. I ususally update the Feeds more often depending on the frequency of updates for a particular Feed. A lot of Feeds make changes hourly... So getting a feed updated once per day, doesn't really do you justice, and I recommend to add the Original Feed source directly into pfBlockerNG and not go thru a third-party to get a Feed.

Also note, that you can enable "Suppression" in the General Tab, which will remove all RFC1918 and loopback addresses automatically which will avoid this issue for the future…

Pippin

@BBcan177:

I recommend to add the Original Feed source directly into pfBlockerNG and not go thru a third-party to get a Feed.

Was thinking about that too now. Next time I have time enough will try to find the original ones.

Also note, that you can enable "Suppression" in the General Tab, which will remove all RFC1918 and loopback addresses automatically which will avoid this issue for the future…

Yeah I saw that but it`s not removing 127.0.0.0/8, 10.0.0.0/8 and 192.168.0.0/16.
0.0.0.0/8 is also on there (:

Will remove that list later, tomorrow another day.

theeddie

http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/hosts

Here is another advert list, this guy actually updates his. I have been VERY happy with it

BBcan177

@theeddie:

http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/hosts

Here is another advert list, this guy actually updates his. I have been VERY happy with it

FYI - This, and other DNSBL Feeds are listed in this thread below: (Just in case you didn't see it before)

https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=102470.msg572943#msg572943
https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=102470.msg573159#msg573159

swedish-master

I have a problem when i use this my DNS stops to work out what am I doing wrong?

Alesk13Fr

Hello,

I'm encountering a problem since my update to PfSense 2.3.2.

I've reinstalled my PfSense Box 8 times in 3 days, each time where I'm using PfSense without PfBlockerNG all is fine, and when I'm installing PfBlockerNG, after few hours (30 minutes to 6 hours) my Box begin to be unaccessible, SSH and Serial, on serial I got a lot of lines of "swap_pager_getswapspace(X): failed".

**Material :
I'm using Lanner Box FW-7568B (spec here in 2 words the specs are :
Intel Atom Dual Core Pineview D-525
8 x GbE Ports (6 x Intel 82574L and 2x Intel 82541P1)
4 Gb DDR3 800 Mhz SODIMM (In fact it's 1 Gb on Motherboard and 4 Gb in SODIMM but the max used by system is 4 Gb)
SSD 128 Go SATA
Hitachi Travelstar 250 Go

**OS :
PfSense 2.3.2 AMD64 (built on Tue Jul 19 12:44:43 CDT 2016)
Full Install from USB Key, with Custom options, embed Kernel

**Interfaces setup :
I'm using a LAGG 8 x 1 GbE with 802.3ad switch behind (2 x Netgear M5300).
4 x WAN connection, all ADSL, 3 are fixed IP and one is dynamic.
All interfaces are on VLAN, just LAN is on LAGG0

**My Packages are :
Avahi : 1.11_2
Nut : 2.3.1
Notes : 0.2.9-2
Service_Watchdog : 1.8.3
PfBlokerNG : Before reinstall it was 2.1.1 after 2.1.1_2

**System tunables :
I'm using system tunables since this lot of crash for this parameters : kern.ipc.nmbclusters

I haven't modified my PfSense installation, I'm using my backuped config.xml who contains parameters for all my package listed upon, and for snort (I'm not using i since a lot of time)

The first time where this happen (10 days ago, with 5 days of balckout because I wasn't near of the box) on 2.3.1, with the update of PfBlokerNG 2.1.1 to 2.1.1_2, I was on vacation, and my Box become unaccessible, when I was back, I've seen my Box unable to boot after the "ldconfig" message during the boot process.

I've changed my first drive from SSD to HDD, to be sure it wasn't a failed drive problem (same if SMART was ok).

Can someone tell me what was wrong ? I'm not sure it's only a software problem, maybe hardware too or only, because my Box was up for 90 days (approx) without any problem and suddendly my problem begin with just PfBlokerNG update …
I don't understand why when PfBlockerNG was installed and did reload the configuration after installation process, my Box become slow specially for Rules and PfBlockerNG page from Web GUI, and for SSH and Serial too.

My config.xml don't have any "pf_*" rules, I've suppressed it manually for all my WAN interfaces, because latest backup (just before my precedent crash contain PfBlockerNG Rules), so I've clean it all PfBlockerNG related on rules, aliases URL, etc ... All my latest PfBlocker settings still on config.xml.

So if you can point me where my problem is I would realy appreciate ...

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Alex.**********