Hello Dan, It sounds like you are saying the rule is "only one AR block per command name"? I know the stock conig has Host.deny and firewall-drop as stock configs on level 6 and I see both of these triggering on the server.. To test this though I went ahead and dropped the firewall-drop that goes to the server, so the only entires are the ALL followed by the AGENT id 001 firewall-drop commands The firewall rule does not execute on the local server now nor does it activate on the agent Doesn't sound like its a 'one AR block per command name" limit but perhaps I misunderstood your comment about "what is not handled"
On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 1:40:29 PM UTC-7, dan (ddpbsd) wrote: > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:34 PM, cmlara <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the response dan. > > > > The configs look right to me the problem is that per the logs the > Automated > > Responses are NOT going across to the agent they are only running on the > > server which is not what I need. > > > > I need the firewall to block on the agents. > > > > You didn't set it up to do that. > > > I put some inline notes about the config below but it boils down to : > > > > "server" according to posts I've seen -- Runs the command on Managment > > Server only > > "all" -- Runs on all agents and excludes the managment server (the > source > > code seems to back this up on quick glance) -- Really should be called > 'all > > agents' > > Don't disagree, but that won't be changing. > > > ID 001 -- this was a fallback testing. > > > > So I have good contact to the agent (according to agent_control manual > > testing run from the command line by me not by OSSEC itself) > > > > AR inside OSSEC it is only executing on the local server (as > configured in > > the first AR block) and is ignoring the 2nd and 3rd AR blocks that say > to > > execute the responses on the agents themselves. > > > > On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 1:07:02 PM UTC-7, dan (ddpbsd) wrote: > >> > >> I don't see a problem with the config, it sounds like it's doing what > >> you've configured it to do. > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:56 PM, cmlara <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Hello All, > >> > > >> > I have setup a new server with OSSEC 2.6 on it running FreeBSD 9.0 > >> > 64bit > >> > > >> > I have a single agent (ID: 001) running on a Linux node (Ubuntu > 12.04 > >> > LTS > >> > 32bit 3.4 kernel) > >> > > >> > I feed all my logs back via syslog to the central logging server that > is > >> > the > >> > same server urnning ossec. > >> > > >> > OSSEC is configured to monitor the log files > >> > > >> > > >> > AR is setup with: > >> > > >> > <active-response> > >> > <!-- Firewall Drop response. Block the IP for > >> > - 600 seconds on the firewall (iptables, > >> > - ipfilter, etc). > >> > --> > >> > <command>firewall-drop</command> > >> > <location>server</location> > >> > <level>6</level> > >> > <timeout>600</timeout> > >> > </active-response> > >> > > >> > >> Ok, so everything at level 6+ gets triggered above. Everything. > >> > >> > >> > <active-response> > >> > <!-- Firewall Drop response. Block the IP for > >> > - 600 seconds on the firewall (iptables, > >> > - ipfilter, etc). > >> > --> > >> > <command>firewall-drop</command> > >> > <location>all</location> > >> > <level>6</level> > >> > <timeout>600</timeout> > >> > </active-response> > >> > > >> > >> We don't get to this one, everything level 6+ is handled in the > previous > >> AR. > >> > > Actually the previous one only runs the processing on the managment > server > > only. This one runs 'all' which actually exculdes the server > according to > > other web posts and the source code. It really should be called 'all > > agents' > > > > The first AR block handles everything level 6+. What alerts does this > AR block handle that the previous block did not? (hint: none) > > >> > >> > > >> > <active-response> > >> > <!-- Firewall Drop response. Block the IP for > >> > - 600 seconds on the firewall (iptables, > >> > - ipfilter, etc). > >> > --> > >> > <command>firewall-drop</command> > >> > <location>defined_aget</location> > >> > <agent_id>001</agent_id> > >> > <level>6</level> > >> > <timeout>600</timeout> > >> > </active-response> > >> > > >> > >> We don't worry about this one either, everything this one handles is > >> taken care of in the first AR block. > >> > > Agreed this is a last ditch effort to see if 'all' is broken as well > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > I know the 'all' will not trigger on the server but it should > trigger > >> > the > >> > agent. That failed to work on the agent so i added the extra > agent_id > >> > 001 > >> > to be sure. > >> > > >> > Looking at the logs/active-responses.log on the server: > >> > > >> > Wed Aug 1 19:41:36 UTC 2012 > >> > /usr/local/ossec-hids/active-response/bin/host-deny.sh add - > >> > 61.135.137.2 > >> > 1343850096.1242729 5712 > >> > Wed Aug 1 19:41:36 UTC 2012 > >> > /usr/local/ossec-hids/active-response/bin/firewall-drop.sh add - > >> > 61.135.137.2 1343850096.1242729 5712 > >> > > >> > (more entries below and above them) > >> > > >> > On the Agent N no log entires show up. The only log entires are where > I > >> > manually ran ./bin/agent_control to test server to agent > >> > communications > >> > which does work: > >> > > >> > Wed Aug 1 16:53:19 UTC 2012 > /var/ossec/active-response/bin/echoalert.sh > >> > add > >> > - 9.9.9.9 (from_the_server) (no_rule_id) > >> > Wed Aug 1 17:03:49 UTC 2012 > /var/ossec/active-response/bin/echoalert.sh > >> > delete - 9.9.9.9 (from_the_server) (no_rule_id) > >> > > >> > > >> > Anyone have any idea why the action is triggering on the server but > not > >> > on > >> > the agents? > >> > > >> > This is basicaly I have a number of frontend servers who are publicly > >> > exposed that do not have their own firewalls in front of them so each > >> > one > >> > will need to firewall itself and should firewall based on the > reports > >> > of > >> > the other frontends. > >> > Best Regards, > >> > > >> > >
