Hi Patrick,

I replied to you privately, but will also reply here. You don't need
the allowed_ips option for the
agent/server communication. It is only used for syslog.

As far as this issue, I believe it is being caused by a system level
resource. Try doing

# ulimit -a

Then increasing whatever limit is set to 1024 (generally -n) to 4096
and restarting ossec:

# ulimit -n 4096
# /var/ossec/bin/ossec-control restart


See if it fixes the issue. And no, ossec shouldn't crash :) I will
check this out too..


thanks,

--
Daniel B. Cid
dcid ( at ) ossec.net

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM,
HouseofSwartz<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Update:  Figured out the remoted issue, we didn't have a <allowed-ips>
> listed in our config file.  Not sure if it is required for our setup.
> However, now the real issue is that port 1514 isn't showing up in
> netstat.  And even worse is this in /var/log/messages -
> Jun 22 10:53:05 n1pvir006 kernel: ossec-remoted[5144]: segfault at
> 0000000000002031 rip 000000000041dedb rsp 00007fff30c55a90 error 4
>
> What would be the best way to fix this error? Re-install?
>
> Please help!!
>
> Thanks,
> Patrick
>
> On Jun 21, 10:36 pm, HouseofSwartz <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Hello and thank you in advance for any help given...
>>
>> I have two issues and not sure if they are related.
>> First, following Daniel's advice (thank you Daniel) we set
>> "setmaxagents" to 4096 and compiled cleanly.  However, after adding
>> the first 1024 clients we now get this error:
>>     - Adding a new agent (use '\q' to return to the main menu).
>>   Please provide the following:
>>    * A name for the new agent:    * The IP Address of the new
>> agent:    * An ID for the new agent[1025]:
>> ** ID '1025' already present. They must be unique.
>>
>> Looking at our client.keys file there isn't an ID of 1025.
>>
>> Second, looking at our log file it appears that 'remoted' is not happy
>> ----
>>
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-remoted: INFO: Started (pid: 12344).
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-remoted(1501): ERROR: No IP or network
>> allowed in the access list for syslog. No reason for running it.
>> Exiting.
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-rootcheck: Rootcheck disabled. Exiting.
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-syscheckd: WARN: Rootcheck module disabled.
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-monitord: INFO: Started (pid: 12354).
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-remoted: INFO: Started (pid: 12346).
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-remoted(4111): INFO: Maximum number of
>> agents allowed: '4096'.
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:58 ossec-remoted(1410): INFO: Reading authentication
>> keys file.
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:59 ossec-syscheckd: socketerr (not available).
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:59 ossec-syscheckd(1224): ERROR: Error sending
>> message to queue.
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:59 ossec-logcollector: socketerr (not available).
>> 2009/06/21 22:51:59 ossec-logcollector(1224): ERROR: Error sending
>> message to queue.
>> 2009/06/21 22:52:02 ossec-syscheckd: INFO: Started (pid: 12350).
>> 2009/06/21 22:52:04 ossec-logcollector(1950): INFO: Analyzing file: '/
>> var/log/messages'.
>> 2009/06/21 22:52:04 ossec-logcollector(1950): INFO: Analyzing file: '/
>> var/log/mail.info'.
>> 2009/06/21 22:52:04 ossec-logcollector: INFO: Started (pid: 12340).
>> 2009/06/21 22:53:38 ossec-syscheckd: INFO: Ending syscheck scan (db).
>> 2009/06/21 22:59:31 ossec-syscheckd: INFO: Starting syscheck scan
>> (db).
>> 2009/06/21 23:09:15 agent_control(1207): ERROR: Unable to switch to
>> group: 'ossec'.
>> 2009/06/21 23:09:30 agent_control(1210): ERROR: Queue '/queue/alerts/
>> ar' not accessible: 'Connection refused'.
>> 2009/06/21 23:09:30 agent_control(1301): ERROR: Unable to connect to
>> active response queue.
>>
>> Here is our 'ossec-init.conf'
>> os...@n1pvir006 > cat ossec-init.conf
>> DIRECTORY="/opt/ossec"
>> VERSION="v2.0"
>> DATE="Wed May 13 12:18:41 EDT 2009"
>> TYPE="server"
>>
>> So, should we be able to go beyond the 1024 clients currently
>> configured?
>> And, is the 'remoted(1501): ERROR" something fixable?
>>
>> Please let me know what other information would be helpful in
>> resolving this issue.
>

Reply via email to