I must say I have to agree with the research suggestion. One of my systems had 
a failed opcode message that I probably would not have seen (or noted the 
frequency) had it not been for the OSSEC install; turned out there was an 
incorrect BIOS setting behind that.

This tendency of programs and syslog messages not to include a program source 
identification is still with us, it seems. And, just saying that it's "Linux" 
is not really enough info: Which distro? Release? Is it up to date?

-- 
Shane Castle
Data Security Mgr, Boulder County IT
CISSP GSEC GCIH


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Jeremy Lee
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 15:48
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ossec-list] Re: alert level 2 error

Hmm... I'm not sure what that's from then. 

If you want to ignore, you can simply add a rule to local_rules.xml. Something 
like this:

<rule id="400001" level="0">
   <match>error initializing: -1</match>
   <description>Ignore "error initializing: -1" messages</description>
 </rule>


The risk is that this rule will ignore anything matching that "error 
initializing: -1" keyword.

I would still try to find out where that error is coming from though, just for 
the sake of due diligence. 





On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 1:59 PM, OSSEC <[email protected]> wrote:


        ok, i saw messages in other servers like this
        
        Feb 16 07:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 08:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 09:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 10:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 11:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 12:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 13:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 14:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 15:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        Feb 16 16:52:42 bai2-ibm-db1 : error initializing: -1
        
        exactly every hour. So the DHCP looks irrelevant to the errors.
        
        It could be an IBM thing? but why just starting happening now?
        
        if i want to ignore it ... it will be a risk involved? if so how i can
        ignore the alert
        


        On Feb 16, 4:28 pm, Jeremy Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
        > Looks like it's an issue with DHCP. Did you try Google to look for 
help on
        > why DHCP might be acting up? Do you have multiple ethernet adapters 
on this
        > server?
        >
        > If you're certain these errors aren't symptoms of a larger problem, 
you
        > could always setup a rule to ignore them.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        
        > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 1:18 PM, OSSEC <[email protected]> 
wrote:
        > > Here is in another server
        >
        > > Feb 16 15:31:43 BAI-MW1 dhclient: bound to 169.254.95.120 -- renewal
        > > in 301 seconds.
        > > Feb 16 15:35:43 BAI-MW1 : error initializing: -1
        > > Feb 16 15:36:44 BAI-MW1 dhclient: DHCPREQUEST on usb0 to
        > > 169.254.95.118 port 67
        > > Feb 16 15:36:44 BAI-MW1 dhclient: DHCPACK from 169.254.95.118
        >
        > > These servers are used for weblogic
        >
        > > On the other two servers the date is wrong ...  will fix that soon,
        > > but im not sure if that was causing the issue. (these are test
        > > servers)
        >
        > > On Feb 16, 3:58 pm, "dan (ddp)" <[email protected]> wrote:
        > > > Look at the proceeding lines, maybe there is a clue there. What's 
the
        > > > purpose of this system?
        >
        > > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:36 PM, OSSEC <[email protected]> 
wrote:
        > > > > Im using linux
        >
        > > > > Here is what i found in /var/log/messages
        >
        > > > > Feb 16 15:15:33 BAI-DB2 : error initializing: -1
        >
        > > > > tons of those lines
        >
        > > > > On Feb 16, 3:20 pm, Jeremy Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
        > > > >> If in Windows just open the log with Notepad, Wordpad, etc and 
run a
        > > "Find"
        >
        > > > >> You should be able to identify the log source that this came 
from, as
        > > Dan
        > > > >> has pointed out.
        >
        > > > >> Let us know.
        >
        > > > >> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:12 PM, dan (ddp) <[email protected]> 
wrote:
        > > > >> > As can be seen here:
        > > > >> >http://www.ossec.net/wiki/Know_How:Email_Alerts_below_7
        > > > >> > the name of the logfile is generally in the alert ("Received 
From:
        > > > >> > (foo) 192.168.0.2->/var/log/messages").
        > > > >> > If it isn't in your alert message, you can use grep if 
you're on a
        > > > >> > sane(r) system. I'm not sure how to find it with Windows.
        >
        > > > >> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:06 PM, OSSEC 
<[email protected]>
        > > wrote:
        > > > >> > > Hey Dan,
        >
        > > > >> > > bai-mw1 is the name of the agent. How i can find out the 
log that
        > > > >> > > message is hidden?
        >
        > > > >> > > thanks
        >
        > > > >> > > On Feb 16, 2:50 pm, "dan (ddp)" <[email protected]> wrote:
        > > > >> > >> Hi Chris,
        > > > >> > >> Find out what BAI-MW1 is. Knowing which log that message 
is
        > > hidden in
        > > > >> > >> might be useful.
        > > > >> > >> Then write a rule for the log message.
        >
        > > > >> > >> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:46 PM, OSSEC 
<[email protected]
        >
        > > > >> > wrote:
        > > > >> > >> > Greetings,
        >
        > > > >> > >> > all of the sudden i've started receiving the following 
error
        > > message
        >
        > > > >> > >> > "Unknown problem somewhere in the system."
        > > > >> > >> > Portion of the log(s):
        >
        > > > >> > >> > Feb 16 14:35:43 BAI-MW1 : error initializing: -1
        >
        > > > >> > >> > I;ve restarted the agents and servers but i still 
having the
        > > same
        > > > >> > >> > issue. These alerts are coming out of few agents not 
all of
        > > them.
        >
        > > > >> > >> > ANy ideas please?
        >
        > > > >> > >> > thanks


Reply via email to