Re-installing the OSSEC agent likely isn't going to resolve the issue. The
issue is with something else on your box not related to OSSEC. OSSEC is just
reporting/alerting on it.

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:09 AM, OSSEC <[email protected]> wrote:

> FYI, I've just reinstalled the agent and still giving me the same
> problem.
>
> On Feb 17, 10:48 am, OSSEC <[email protected]> wrote:
> > thanks all.
> >
> > Yeah i really want to find out what is going on, since i dont want to
> > take the risk of just ignore it.
> >
> > This a Red Hat 5.X
> >
> > [root@BAI-MW2 bin]# uname -a
> > Linux  2.6.18-194.17.4.el5 #1 SMP Wed Oct 20 13:03:08 EDT 2010 x86_64
> > x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> >
> > That said im going to keep looking .. although i'm running out of
> > ideas of where to look. If you have any ideas on how to troubleshoot
> > more deeply please advice.
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> > On Feb 16, 6:00 pm, "Castle, Shane" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 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