On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Dayco Telecom <[email protected]> wrote:
> I did download the WUI version on the ossec.net Web page(http://
> www.ossec.net/files/ui/ossec-wui-0.3.tar.gz)
>
> what patched version do I need?
> Where can I get it?
>

Are you not reading the emails in this thread?
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/ossec-list/wui/ossec-list/mUfhTsNUCkQ/6f5tb_-xqt8J

Good luck with your WUI issues.

>
>
> On 21 jun, 12:25, "dan (ddp)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Dayco Telecom <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hi Dan, I did install the WUI again this morning and the WUI is stil
>> > wrong, the WUI is v0.3
>>
>> > What can I do?
>>
>> Are you using the patched files? The ones that are supposed to work
>> with the new logging format? 0.3 is broken, it's dead. You have to use
>> the patched version.
>>
>>
>>
>> > cheers...
>>
>> > On 20 jun, 08:48, "dan (ddp)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Dayco Telecom <[email protected]> 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hi people, my OSSEC server show.
>>
>> >> > WUI view:
>>
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 Rule Id: 18149 level: 3
>> >> > Location: (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Src IP: YNAMIC-DAYCO$
>> >> > Windows User Logoff.
>>
>> >> You're still using a broken WUI. Update it and try again.
>>
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 Rule Id: 18105 level: 4
>> >> > Location: (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Src IP: o user)
>> >> > Windows audit failure event.
>>
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 Rule Id: 18105 level: 4
>> >> > Location: (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Src IP: o user)
>> >> > Windows audit failure event.
>>
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 Rule Id: 18105 level: 4
>> >> > Location: (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Src IP: o user)
>> >> > Windows audit failure event.
>>
>> >> > OSSEC Alert log view:
>>
>> >> > ** Alert 1340139464.176284: - windows,
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Rule: 18105 (level 4) -> 'Windows audit failure event.'
>> >> > User: (no user)
>> >> > WinEvtLog: Security: AUDIT_FAILURE(5159): Microsoft-Windows-Security-
>> >> > Auditing: (no user): no domain: VDynamic-dayco.daycohost.local: The
>> >> > Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a bind to a local port.
>> >> > Application Information:  Process ID:  680  Application Name: \device
>> >> > \harddiskvolume1\windows\system32\lsass.exe  Network Information:
>> >> > Source Address:  0.0.0.0  Source Port:  53661  Protocol:  17  Filter
>> >> > Information:  Filter Run-Time ID: 0  Layer Name:  %%14608  Layer Run-
>> >> > Time ID: 36
>>
>> >> > ** Alert 1340139464.176940: - windows,
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Rule: 18105 (level 4) -> 'Windows audit failure event.'
>> >> > User: (no user)
>> >> > WinEvtLog: Security: AUDIT_FAILURE(5159): Microsoft-Windows-Security-
>> >> > Auditing: (no user): no domain: VDynamic-dayco.daycohost.local: The
>> >> > Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a bind to a local port.
>> >> > Application Information:  Process ID:  680  Application Name: \device
>> >> > \harddiskvolume1\windows\system32\lsass.exe  Network Information:
>> >> > Source Address:  0.0.0.0  Source Port:  53662  Protocol:  17  Filter
>> >> > Information:  Filter Run-Time ID: 0  Layer Name:  %%14608  Layer Run-
>> >> > Time ID: 36
>>
>> >> > ** Alert 1340139464.177596: - windows,
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Rule: 18105 (level 4) -> 'Windows audit failure event.'User: (no user)
>> >> > WinEvtLog: Security: AUDIT_FAILURE(5159): Microsoft-Windows-Security-
>> >> > Auditing: (no user): no domain: VDynamic-dayco.daycohost.local: The
>> >> > Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a bind to a local port.
>> >> > Application Information:  Process ID:  1296  Application Name: \device
>> >> > \harddiskvolume1\windows\system32\svchost.exe  Network Information:
>> >> > Source Address:  0.0.0.0  Source Port:  56759  Protocol:  17  Filter
>> >> > Information:  Filter Run-Time ID: 0  Layer Name:  %%14608  Layer Run-
>> >> > Time ID: 36
>>
>> >> > ** Alert 1340139464.178255: - windows,
>> >> > 2012 Jun 19 16:27:44 (VDynamic-dayco) 10.0.1.3->WinEvtLog
>> >> > Rule: 18149 (level 3) -> 'Windows User Logoff.'User: VDYNAMIC-DAYCO$
>> >> > WinEvtLog: Security: AUDIT_SUCCESS(4634): Microsoft-Windows-Security-
>> >> > Auditing: VDYNAMIC-DAYCO$: DAYCOHOST: VDynamic-dayco.daycohost.local:
>> >> > An account was logged off. Subject:  Security ID:  S-1-5-18  Account
>> >> > Name:  VDYNAMIC-DAYCO$  Account Domain:  DAYCOHOST  Logon ID:
>> >> > 0x6060269  Logon Type:   3  This event is generated when a logon
>> >> > session is destroyed. It may be positively correlated with a logon
>> >> > event using the Logon ID value. Logon IDs are only unique between
>> >> > reboots on the same computer."  4646,1
>>
>> >> > DB (MySQL) view, table Data:
>>
>> >> > '997', '1', '(no user)', 'WinEvtLog: Security: AUDIT_FAILURE(5159):
>> >> > Microsoft-Windows-Security-Auditing: (no user): no domain: VDynamic-
>> >> > dayco.daycohost.local: The Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a
>> >> > bind to a local port. Application Information:  Process ID:  1296
>> >> > Application Name: /device/harddiskvolume1/windows/system32/
>> >> > svchost.exe  Network Information:  Source Address:  0.0.0.0  Source
>> >> > Port:  64330  Protocol:  17  Filter Information:  Filter Run-Time ID:
>> >> > 0  Layer Name:  %%14608  Layer Run-Time ID: 36', NULL
>> >> > '998', '1', '(no user)', 'WinEvtLog: System: ERROR(7001): Service
>> >> > Control Manager: (no user): no domain: DYC-ACCUNETIX: The WinHTTP Web
>> >> > Proxy Auto-Discovery Service service depends on the DHCP Client
>> >> > service which failed to start because of the following error:   %
>> >> > %1058  ', NULL
>> >> > '999', '1', '(no user)', 'WinEvtLog: Security: AUDIT_FAILURE(5159):
>> >> > Microsoft-Windows-Security-Auditing: (no user): no domain: VDynamic-
>> >> > dayco.daycohost.local: The Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a
>> >> > bind to a local port. Application Information:  Process ID:  680
>> >> > Application Name: /device/harddiskvolume1/windows/system32/lsass.exe
>> >> > Network Information:  Source Address:  0.0.0.0  Source Port:  64331
>> >> > Protocol:  17  Filter Information:  Filter Run-Time ID: 0  Layer
>> >> > Name:  %%14608  Layer Run-Time ID: 36', NULL
>> >> > '1000', '1', '(no user)', 'WinEvtLog: Security: AUDIT_FAILURE(5159):
>> >> > Microsoft-Windows-Security-Auditing: (no user): no domain: VDynamic-
>> >> > dayco.daycohost.local: The Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a
>> >> > bind to a local port. Application Information:  Process ID:  680
>> >> > Application Name: /device/harddiskvolume1/windows/system32/lsass.exe
>> >> > Network Information:  Source Address:  0.0.0.0  Source Port:  64332
>> >> > Protocol:  17  Filter Information:  Filter Run-Time ID: 0  Layer
>> >> > Name:  %%14608  Layer Run-Time ID: 36', NULL
>>
>> >> > The installation of the compiled OSSEC was install using the OSSEC
>> >> > books guide and the OSSEC.net documetation.
>> >> > The installation of the OSSEC WUI was install using the OSSEC.net
>> >> > documetation.
>>
>> >> > The others OSSEC server I installed before was on a lab with non
>> >> > compiled DB mode and another with compiled DB mode w/o enabling it and
>> >> > all works fine till then
>>
>> >> > I choose DB Compiled this time 'cause it's a OSSEC Server for non-lab
>> >> > enviroment and it's going to be a Core plattform with around 500
>> >> > Clients, so the amount of logs can be high.
>>
>> >> > I don't know if some aditional configuration is necesary to WUI for
>> >> > read the Data from DB or if the WUI just simple read the log.
>>
>> >> WUI does not look at the db, just the logs.
>>
>> >> > * Any idea?
>> >> > * I need to re-configure to a non DB compiled mode to work that way?
>>
>> >> It should work fine with or without the db.
>>
>> >> > Thanks a lot!!!
>>
>> >> > Cheers...
>>
>> >> > On 19 jun, 14:55, "dan (ddp)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Mike Disley
>>
>> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> > Yes, it's a full_command rule but I'm not using OSSEC with a DB.
>>
>> >> >> Oops, I didn't notice that you weren't the OP. So, yeah, you probably
>> >> >> installed the patches incorrectly.
>>
>> >> >> Yet another reason I avoid the WUI: I don't know php.
>>
>> >> >> > -----Original Message-----
>> >> >> > From: [email protected] 
>> >> >> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of dan (ddp)
>> >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 2:30 PM
>> >> >> > To: [email protected]
>> >> >> > Subject: Re: [ossec-list] Re: Error in message formating on OSSEC Wui
>>
>> >> >> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Mike Disley 
>> >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> Greetings,
>> >> >> >> I have the same prob.  I applied the patches but no joy.  Enclosed 
>> >> >> >> is an alert first from the WUI and the corresponding entry in 
>> >> >> >> alerts.log.
>>
>> >> >> >> OSSEC WUI Alert List:
>>
>> >> >> >> 2012 Jun 19 12:45:40 Rule Id: 140123 level: 7
>> >> >> >> Location: (someonesPC) 1x.21.1.1x4->netstat -an | findstr "\80\>
>> >> >> >> \443\>" | findstr TCP Src IP: utput: 'netstat -an | findstr "\80\>
>> >> >> >> \443\>" | findstr TCP': TCP 1X.21.1.1X4:34594 66.35.45.157:443
>> >> >> >> ESTABLISHED Outbound Internet Access Detected
>> >> >> >> ossec: output: 'netstat -an | findstr "\80\> \443\>" | findstr TCP':
>> >> >> >> TCP 1X.21.1.1x4:22697 23.9.96.60:443 CLOSE_WAIT
>>
>> >> >> >> OSSEC Server alerts.log
>>
>> >> >> >> ** Alert 1340124340.19381: mail  - local
>> >> >> >> 2012 Jun 19 12:45:40 (someonesPC) 1x.21.1.1x4->netstat -an | findstr
>> >> >> >> "\80\> \443\>" | findstr TCP
>> >> >> >> Rule: 140123 (level 7) -> 'Outbound Internet Access Detected'
>> >> >> >> ossec: output: 'netstat -an | findstr "\80\> \443\>" | findstr TCP':
>> >> >> >> TCP    1x.21.1.1x4:34594      66.35.45.157:443       ESTABLISHED 
>> >> >> >> Previous output:
>> >> >> >> ossec: output: 'netstat -an | findstr "\80\> \443\>" | findstr TCP':
>> >> >> >> TCP    1x.21.1.1x4:22697      23.9.96.60:443         CLOSE_WAIT
>>
>> >> >> > I'm guessing that this is some full_command based rule. If so, add 
>> >> >> > an alias to it to make it a little more manageable.
>>
>> >> >> > This rule is parsed correctly on the non-db systems? If so, you've 
>> >> >> > done something wrong with the WUI on the db system.
>>
>> >> >> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> >> >> From: [email protected]...
>>
>> leer más »

Reply via email to