Suricata true inline IPS mode coming with pfSense 2.3 – here is a preview
-
This desperately needs to happen… I need Inline mode so bad, I can't describe how badly I need it. We have so much junk traffic tossed at valid IPs that perfectly good sites get blocked and many web/cloud based tools that my faculty and staff depend on become useless.
I've tuned Suricata rules until I can't see straight, and still, valid sites get blocked.
Come on devs, roll this stuff out! We are all rooting for you (and whining a bit).
Suricata 3.1.1 has been out for a while now in production, I wonder if there are still underlying netmap/driver issues causing problems with Inline mode?
-
I installed suricata, and the installer complained about some mysql client vulnerability that will not be patched. Something to be worried about?
-
@<deleted>:</deleted>
Suricata package has been updated today from 3.0_7 to 3.0_8.
From the changelogs I see only a fix for "Suricata, a broken download should not wait forever." ,and some changes in licenses.
@bmeeks I don't understand, why not jumping to the latest version, with latest fixes, because they are alot ?
10x
I have been very busy with other work outside of my volunteer package maintainer duties for Suricata and Snort. The other work pays me, the volunteer maintainer duties do not … ;).
I am testing the latest 3.1.1 binary this weekend and hope to have a pull request posted very soon.
Bill
-
Will inline IDS be working with the latest Suricata update?
-
Will inline IDS be working with the latest Suricata update?
Hopefully better than it currently does. The issues are pretty much all netmap related as netmap is a relatively new technology. Suricata has had some upstream bugs reported around the netmap interface used for inline mode. A lot of those reported issues are fixed in the 3.1.1 release.
Bill
-
Thank you @BMeeks!
Looks like there's an updated Suricata in Package Manager with the latest 3.1.1_1 version. Trying it out now!
-
Does latest suricata 3.1.1_1 support hyperscan pattern match ?
-
-
2.3.3_dev
-
-
Does latest suricata 3.1.1_1 support hyperscan pattern match ?
It's not turned on yet. That is next on my list to test. Not sure what kinds of tweaking may be required in FreeBSD ports to get that enabled and compiling successfully.
Bill
-
I will give inline mode a go again when Suricata 3.1.1 becomes available.
-
Available now… for pfSense 2.3.3x and 2.4 development versions. Not the pfSense stable, yet.
Version 3.0.8 of Suricata for pfSense contains the Suricata 3.1.1_1 update - the pfSense implementation hasn't been up-rev'd.
-
2.3.2-p1 is the latest version according to my dashboard. I do not risk using development versions. Pfsense is in a production environment.
-
Lately, when I ask for status on Inline Suricata, the thread gets deleted. What's up with that? I thought this was a community forum.
I will attempt more questions
Is it in testing?
How is the testing going?
What are the issues?
Why is PFsense so far behind in Suricata updates?
How many people are working on it?
Do you need testers, or help?
Is there an ETA?
Should I move on?I guess the last question depends on if this post also gets deleted, or I get banned for asking questions.
-
You should probably move on and do IPS on a dedicated machine running a hardend version of your favorite OS.
It's not a priority on pfSense (for now) and if you haven't setup a full blown SIEM solution it's anyway a toy ;-).Regarding your questions, just search through the forum and you'll find your answers.
Regards,
Emanuel
-
Not the first time I have seen that reply about a SIEM… one has nothing to do with the other. Wanting Suricata working in inline mode on my firewall is completely unrelated to a SIEM and is definitely not relegated to "toy" status in the absense of a SIEM. I'd love to have a serious discussion (off of the forum if necessary to reduce clutter) about this as I am not trying to throw rocks or start a flame war. I just don't grok the relationship between running Suricata in inline mode and having or not having a SIEM.
-
Lately, when I ask for status on Inline Suricata, the thread gets deleted. What's up with that? I thought this was a community forum.
I will attempt more questions
Is it in testing?
Yes, of course. https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=118541.msg656395#msg656395
How is the testing going?
Are you helping?
What are the issues?
Take a look in that thread, or the FreeBSD bug tracker, below. There are a number of reasons why this software hasn't merged into FreeBSD as yet.
Why is PFsense so far behind in Suricata updates?
So far behind what?
Suricata 3.1.2 was released on 7 September: https://suricata-ids.org/2016/09/07/suricata-3-1-2-released/
At the moment 3.1.1 and Hyperscan are still pending in the FreeBSD bug tracker.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210490As is Suricata 3.1.2
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212815As you can see by looking at that, Herr Fitchitis is hard at work to make both happen. Given this, I don't see how any additional effort on our part would make it happen any sooner.
How many people are working on it?
Which part?
Are you helping?Do you need testers, or help?
We always need testers. Thank you.
Is there an ETA?
No.
Should I move on?
You're welcome to stay and you're welcome to contribute.
As with most things, this is your choice, not mine.
-
Not the first time I have seen that reply about a SIEM… one has nothing to do with the other. Wanting Suricata working in inline mode on my firewall is completely unrelated to a SIEM and is definitely not relegated to "toy" status in the absense of a SIEM. I'd love to have a serious discussion (off of the forum if necessary to reduce clutter) about this as I am not trying to throw rocks or start a flame war. I just don't grok the relationship between running Suricata in inline mode and having or not having a SIEM.
An IPS responds to known threats. IDS has a different task set. It must identify a large number of threats, including:
Security policy violations, such as systems or users who are running applications against policy.
Infections, such as viruses or Trojan horses that have partial or full control of internal systems, using them to spread infection and attack other systems.
Information leakage, such as systems running spyware and key loggers, as well as accidental information leakage by valid users.
Configuration errors, such as applications or systems with incorrect security settings or performance-killing network misconfiguration, as well as misconfigured firewalls where the rule set does not match policy.
Unauthorized clients and servers including network-threatening server applications such as DHCP or DNS service, along with unauthorized applications such as network scanning tools or unsecured remote desktop.
Doing these without an SIEM is nearly impossible.
-
Right! These are two different tasks. I'm not interested in my firewall telling me all this stuff, at least not my Internet facing firewall. I want it to guard my perimeter and drop bad traffic, but not interfere with my users' legitimate connectivity. Hence, I want Suricata to run as an IPS on my external firewall, preferrably without the pain of unintentionally blocking valid sites and traffic because of a mangled packet somewhere.
I am exploring internal sensors and SIEM solutions, potentially using Suricata, wherein I will look for all those other things, but the lack of this capability does not lessen the effectiveness of my perimeter firewall.
They perform two distinct tasks.
Any further debate can move to another thread or offline, I don't want to take this thread off the rails.
Thanks for the input, I do like it whether I agree with all of it or not! :)
