pfSense bugtracker: Issueshttps://redmine.pfsense.org/https://redmine.pfsense.org/favicon.ico?16780521162024-03-05T19:53:06ZpfSense bugtracker
Redmine pfSense Packages - Bug #15313 (Confirmed): Zabbix server 6.4.12 requires Zabbix proxies to be ver...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/153132024-03-05T19:53:06ZAndrew Almond
<p>There seems to be a bug/change with Zabbix server and Zabbix proxy where both need to be running 6.4.12.<br />If the versions don't match, then the proxy is unable to receive configuration changes from the server and shows this message in the log:</p>
<pre>
cannot process received configuration data from server at "192.168.1.8": unexpected field "httptest.status"
</pre>
<p>There are 3 bug reports with Zabbix about this issue:<br /><a class="external" href="https://support.zabbix.com/browse/ZBX-24162">https://support.zabbix.com/browse/ZBX-24162</a><br /><a class="external" href="https://support.zabbix.com/browse/ZBX-24161">https://support.zabbix.com/browse/ZBX-24161</a><br /><a class="external" href="https://support.zabbix.com/browse/ZBX-23232">https://support.zabbix.com/browse/ZBX-23232</a></p>
<p>It looks like this issue was addressed in Zabbix 6.4.12:<br /><a class="external" href="https://git.zabbix.com/projects/ZBX/repos/zabbix/commits/28b3672d114">https://git.zabbix.com/projects/ZBX/repos/zabbix/commits/28b3672d114</a></p>
<p>We are running 23.05.1 and the package manager installs Zabbix 6.4.1 (revision 546e284fd7c).<br />Would it be possible to have the Zabbix proxy and agent packages updated to 6.4.12?</p>
<p>It looks like the packages were updated to 6.4.8 for pfSense 23.09, so even upgrading to that will not solve the issue.<br /><a class="external" href="https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/14913">https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/14913</a></p> pfSense Packages - Bug #15274 (Incomplete): HAProxy Configuration Changes Require pfSense Reboot ...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/152742024-02-20T21:51:14ZZachary Cohen
<p>As originally reported here (<a class="external" href="https://forum.netgate.com/topic/172972/haproxy-config-changes-not-loaded-pfsense-restart-needed">https://forum.netgate.com/topic/172972/haproxy-config-changes-not-loaded-pfsense-restart-needed</a>), changes made to the HAProxy configuration require a reboot to take effect.</p>
<p>I'm consistently able to reproduce this issue when adding new backends.</p>
<p>When browsing to the new backend, I receive a 503 - "no server is available to handle this request". After rebooting, it works as expected.</p>
<p>Other users have been able to validate that this issue was present starting with pfSense 2.6.0 and HAProxy version haproxy-devel 0.62.10.</p>
<p>While I was able to replicate that issue starting on that version, I'm currently replicating it in pfSense 2.7.2-RELEASE (amd64) and haproxy-devel 0.63_2.</p> pfSense Packages - Bug #15131 (Incomplete): OpenVPN client export issues with iPhone and IPV6 con...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/151312024-01-02T18:38:40ZJonathan Lee
<p>I have researched and found an issue within the OpenVPN's client export config file for iPhones (OpenVPN Connect (iOS/Android))</p>
<p>it exports with udp4 listed and this does not work with iPhones because of ipv6 in the config (.ovpn) file and must be changed to udp for iOS iPhones to work with OpenVPN and pfSense.</p>
<p>That is the only adaption needed to fix this issue.</p> pfSense - Bug #15015 (New): Static routes not workinghttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/150152023-11-20T17:53:07ZSilviu Bajenaru
<p>Hello,</p>
<p>This morning I updated to PFSense 2.7.1 from 2.7.0. Now, I just tried to add a dynamic gateway and a static route. Unfortunately, the static route is not being added to the routing table. I restored the VM backup from this morning, before I updated, added the same gateway and static route and it was added to the routing table, and everything works fine.<br />I've set the priority to Urgent since this is quite bad for a router...?</p>
More info about my setup: I've got three sites, let's call them A, B and C. There is an IPSec tunnel between A and B, and one between B and C. Both tunnels are set with Mode VTI. I've assigned the ipsec interfaces and set the gateways and routes:<br />Site A has a gateway set on the IPSec interface and a route for site C that uses that gateway.<br />Site B has two gateways (one for each IPSec tunnel) and the following routes:
<ul>
<li>route to site A via the IPSec interface - gateway - going to site A</li>
<li>route to site B via the IPSec interface - gateway - going to site B<br />Site C has a gateway set on the IPSec interface and a route for site A that uses that gateway.<br />Site A was updated this morning to PFSense 2.7.1, while Site C is running 2.7.0.<br />Site A DOES NOT have the static routes added to the routing table.<br />Site C does have the static routes added to the routing table.</li>
</ul>
<p>Once I reverted Site A to 2.7.0, I did the same config again and the routes were added to the routing table.</p>
<p>Thank you.</p> pfSense - Bug #14741 (New): PHP error in DNS Forwarder host overrides when the language is set to...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/147412023-09-02T10:26:29ZNicolas PISTER
<p>A PHP error occur when a user try to add or modify Host Override in DNS Forwarder module</p>
<pre>
amd64
14.0-CURRENT
FreeBSD 14.0-CURRENT #1 RELENG_2_7_0-n255866-686c8d3c1f0: Wed Jun 28 04:21:19 UTC 2023 root@freebsd:/var/jenkins/workspace/pfSense-CE-snapshots-2_7_0-main/obj/amd64/LwYAddCr/var/jenkins/workspace/pfSense-CE-snapshots-2_7_0-main/sources/FreeBSD-src-REL
Crash report details:
PHP Errors:
[02-Sep-2023 11:55:24 Europe/Paris] PHP Fatal error: Uncaught ValueError: Unknown format specifier "p" in /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php:127
Stack trace:
#0 /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php(127): sprintf('Nom de domaine ...', '<br />')
#1 /usr/local/www/services_dnsmasq_edit.php(85): Form_Input->setHelp('Domain of the h...', '<br />')
#2 {main}
thrown in /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php on line 127
[02-Sep-2023 11:58:37 Europe/Paris] PHP Fatal error: Uncaught ValueError: Unknown format specifier "p" in /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php:127
Stack trace:
#0 /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php(127): sprintf('Nom de domaine ...', '<br />')
#1 /usr/local/www/services_dnsmasq_edit.php(85): Form_Input->setHelp('Domain of the h...', '<br />')
#2 {main}
thrown in /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php on line 127
[02-Sep-2023 11:58:46 Europe/Paris] PHP Fatal error: Uncaught ValueError: Unknown format specifier "p" in /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php:127
Stack trace:
#0 /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php(127): sprintf('Nom de domaine ...', '<br />')
#1 /usr/local/www/services_dnsmasq_edit.php(85): Form_Input->setHelp('Domain of the h...', '<br />')
#2 {main}
thrown in /usr/local/www/classes/Form/Input.class.php on line 127
</pre>
<p>I think it come from a french translation file because when i use original language, everithing works.</p> pfSense - Bug #14604 (New): Bugs in dhclient implementation according to RFC 2131https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/146042023-07-23T14:11:19ZNazar Mokrynskyi
<p>I had issues with one of the ISPs on pfSense and after talking to their tech support and observing what is happening I believe there are bugs in dhclient used by pfSense.<br />It is likely an upstream issue, but I don't use FreeBSD, so I report it here.<br />This is what triggers <a class="external" href="https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/14237">https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/14237</a> (which I believe is a buggy gateway groups implementation in pfSense and is a distinct issue, this one is just one way to trigger it, but maybe not the only one).</p>
<p>Dump of communication between pfSense and DHCP server of ISP is also attached.<br />The issue happened on 2.6.x and still happens on 2.7.0 that I'm currently running.</p>
<p>Below is basically an English translation of the response from IPS support representative.</p>
<p>The first thing that is believed to be handling DHCPDISCOVER. According to RFC 2131:<br /> The client begins in INIT state and forms a DHCPDISCOVER message.<br /> The client SHOULD wait a random time between one and ten seconds to<br /> desynchronize the use of DHCP at startup.</p>
<p>So client must wait for DHCPOFFER up to 10 seconds. During this time client can receive answers from multiple DHCP servers and pick settings it prefers.</p>
<p>The other issue is that according to RFC 2131 Unicast request Request Renew must be done between T1 and T2. Time approximately equal tothe lease time<br />(with slight random offset) - T1 timer. pfSense's dhclient only uses T2 (0.85*lease time), this is not quite correct, request according to T2 timer is usually<br />done in case first request to extend lease failed (depends on implementation and DHCP client settings). According to RFC after T2 time client must switch to<br />REBINDING and make boardcast request, which is what happened. If cient doesn't send request/doesn't receive response within lease time then settings must be<br />cleared and procedure of obtaining IP address start over.<br />Current lease time is 10 minutes (600 seconds).<br />Separately sometimes dhclient doesn't send DHCPREQUEST within lease time, for instance record <a class="issue tracker-4 status-5 priority-4 priority-default closed" title="Todo: PPTP users integration with user manager (Closed)" href="https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/34">#34</a> and 37, between then there was more than 600 seconds and<br />procedure to get IP address started over, which is when Internet access was temporarily lost.</p> pfSense - Bug #14397 (New): DHCPv4 client (dhclient) does not use 802.1p Priority tagging on DHCP...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/143972023-05-19T14:52:52ZTue Madsen
<p>Some ISPs using VLANs for service, require DHCPv4/v6 Frames to be 802.1p priority tagged. <br />pfSense has the option to do this by either:<br />- Setting VLAN priority tagging in the Interface DHCP options (if you are not using Advanced configuration or a predefined configuration file)<br />- If using advanced configuration: By adding “vlan-pcp x” in the advanced modifier options.</p>
<p>BUG:<br />This priority setting in only used in DISCOVER and RELEASE frames sent by dhclient - NOT in RENEW or REBIND.</p>
<p>This is now causing major problems in France where Orange (Major ISP) has upgraded to also requiring the RENEW frames to be properly VLAN Priority tagged.<br />This causes the uplink to stop working when a renew is due. (About once a day)</p>
<p>I don’t know if the issue is the same in DHCPv6</p>
<p>The issue was patched in OPNsense about a month ago, and they decided to drop the advanced options overwrite of the VLAN priority setting in interface DHCP options. <br />Instead they let the user choose if VLAN priority should be used via the interface DHCP VLAN Priority setting already available. <br />If selected it would - apart from adding “vlan-pcp x” to the dhclient config - also set the priority tag in the builtin pffilter rule that passes Interface DHCP client traffic. This adds the tag to RENEW and REBIND frames.</p>
<p>The issue occurs because dhclient uses a bfg interface for DISCOVER and RELEASE - thus respecting the vlan-pcp settings. But for RENEW it uses a simple socket, and that causes it not to be tagged correctly. In pfSense you cannot create a floating match rule to manually tag the traffic that has higher priority than the builtin pass quick rule for the interface DHCP client.</p> pfSense Packages - Bug #13544 (New): SquidGuard either denying everything or proxying everythinghttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/135442022-10-05T01:40:03ZJimmy Michaelson
<p>Hey,</p>
<p>I truly doubt this is a configuration issue as I've tried all the possible combinations.</p>
<p>Relevant images and config:</p>
<p><a class="external" href="https://forum.netgate.com/topic/175057/10-btc-bounty-squid-proxy-whitelist-per-source-ip/6">https://forum.netgate.com/topic/175057/10-btc-bounty-squid-proxy-whitelist-per-source-ip/6</a></p>
<p>FYI: The bounty has been bumped to $20 and is also valid here.</p> pfSense Packages - Bug #13214 (Pull Request Review): AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no att...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/132142022-05-25T02:51:39ZIan Grindley
<p>After installing Prometheus node_exporter error messages appeared containing the following:</p>
<p>Arpwatch Notification : Cron <root@pfsense> /usr/bin/nice -n20 /usr/local/share/pfSense-pkg-node_exporter/interface-collector.py -</p>
<p>X-Cron-Env: <SHELL=/bin/sh><br />X-Cron-Env: <PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin><br />X-Cron-Env: <HOME=/root><br />X-Cron-Env: <LOGNAME=root><br />X-Cron-Env: <USER=root></p>
<p>Traceback (most recent call last):<br /> File "/usr/local/share/pfSense-pkg-node_exporter/interface-collector.py", line 29, in <module><br /> descr = elem.find('descr').text<br />AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'text'</p> pfSense Packages - Bug #12979 (Pull Request Review): Snort Rules Update Process Using Deprecated ...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/129792022-03-23T14:23:01ZBill Meeks
<p>Beginning around the first of March 2022, the Snort rules update package from the Snort VRT changed the subdirectory name for the precompiled Shared Object (SO) rules, in the archive, from "FreeBSD-12" to "FreeBSD-13". The Snort rules update code in the GUI parses the current FreeBSD version from the operating system, so since pfSense is still on FreeBSD 12.3, this results in the rules update code searching for a non-existent "FreeBSD-12" subdirectory in the archive when unpacking it. Until such time as pfSense moves to FreeBSD-13, this logic needs to be changed and the subdirectory name hard-coded to "FreeBSD-13".</p> pfSense Packages - Bug #12608 (New): WireGuard tunnels monitored by dpinger causing system to sto...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/126082021-12-16T15:14:54ZChristian McDonaldcmcdonald@netgate.com
<p>Current workaround is to disable gateway monitoring on WireGuard tunnel gateways.</p>
<p>(I will be noting observations here as I unpack this)</p> pfSense - Bug #9295 (New): IPv6 PD does not work with PPPOE (Server & Client)https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/92952019-01-29T11:51:01ZDirk Steingäßer
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>as encountering DHCPv6 with Prefix delegation does not work together with PPPOE Server vice versa it is not possible to get a prefix with an interface where the IPv4 Uplink is PPPOE.</p> pfSense - Bug #9123 (Feedback): Adding/configuring vlan on ixl-devices causes aq_add_macvlan err ...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/91232018-11-15T10:50:14ZSebastian Deuerling
<p>The actual vlan addition/configuring process is triggering error "aq_add_macvlan err -53, aq_error 14" on ixl-devices.<br />Configuring vlans seems to work nevertheless, but saving interface configurations with vlans takes a lot of time.<br />In our setup (two igb-interfaces, two ix-interfaces, two ixl-interfaces; 25 vlans on failover-lagg of ixl0 and igb0) saving changes on interface configuration lasts around about 20 to 30 minutes. After that pfSense seems to freeze. After reboot all vlans are working.<br />But booting also takes a lof of time. Around 5 minutes in step "Configuring VLANS...".<br />Our hardware: SYS-5018D-FN4T (Supermicro Intel Xeon D-1541 system) and X710DA2BLK (Intel X710-DA2 Dual-SFP+-PCIe-Addon-cards).<br />Further information here: <a class="external" href="https://forum.netgate.com/topic/136201/new-version-2-4-4-interface-error-aq_add_macvlan-err-53-aq_error-14/14">https://forum.netgate.com/topic/136201/new-version-2-4-4-interface-error-aq_add_macvlan-err-53-aq_error-14/14</a></p> pfSense - Bug #8964 (New): IPsec async cryptography advanced setting - TCP traffic not passing t...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/89642018-09-27T02:25:33ZVladimir Lind
<p>Test setup:</p>
<p>Windows <-> SG2220 2.4.4-rel <---IPSEC---> SG3100 2.4.4-rel <-> Windows</p>
<p>IPsec (tunnel mode) with following settings:<br />P1 - mode Auto, AES128, SHA256, DH14<br />P2 - AES128GCM, no hash, PFS 14</p>
<p>ICMP between Win hosts is OK.<br />But SMB traffic is not going through with Async Crypto enabled on any side. I do see established TSP session. When I disable async crypto - SMB download immediately begin to flow.<br />Attached a packet dump sniffed on LAN of the 3100 - it is a snippet of the moment when async was disabled (lines 12-15) and SMB began to work.</p>
<p>Please refer also to trouble tickets 12812 and 12864 for additional details.</p> pfSense - Bug #5413 (Confirmed): Incorrect Handling of Unbound Resolver [service restarts, cache ...https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/54132015-11-10T23:42:22Zky41083 -
<p>The right way to handle local DNS changes, for Unbound at least, would basically be to do the opposite of what is being done now. Rather than write to the config files and bounce the service, you would use unbound-control to tell Unbound about the local DNS changes.</p>
<p>Discussion here: <a class="external" href="https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=89589.0">https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=89589.0</a><br />Full rough draft solution here: <a class="external" href="https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=89589.msg568043#msg568043">https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=89589.msg568043#msg568043</a></p>
<p>Quick and dirty rough draft summary... doubt code syntax is even completely right (if I had more time it would be, leave it up to who codes it), but this method is the only right one. The only other solution would be to remove Unbound completely and replace it with something else (please don't, it works very well when used correctly).</p>
<p>Functions like this:<br />$unbound_entries .= "local-data: \"{$host['fqdn']} {$type} {$host['ipaddr']}\"\n";</p>
<p>Should be changed to something like this:<br />$unbound_cmd .= "unbound-control local_data {$host['fqdn']} {$type} {$host['ipaddr']}";</p>
<p>And NEVER EVER bounce the Unbound service. Ever. It is completely unnecessary.</p>
<p>Initial service start / user initiated service restart should probably use the same unbound-control calls for managing all local DNS entries, to prevent both modifying Unbound config files and calling unbound-control to do the same exact thing. Plus it's cleaner, now we don't have 2 code paths to maintain (config files & unbound-control), and we don't use more RAM to store unneeded config file entries.</p>
<p>Additional implementation considerations can be found in the cited post above.</p>