If AR isn't working on the agents when the server AR block was removed
start inveatigating the agents. Is ar enabled? Is execd running? If you
turn on debug (-d) are there any interesting log messages?
On Aug 1, 2012 8:59 PM, "cmlara" <[email protected]> wrote:

> As far as I can tell it  isn't but I am far from the expert here.
>
> I know I'm not seeing packets outbound so it for sure isn't network
> related must be config somewhere.
>
> Will run a few more tests on that tonight and try and trace it down.
>
> If anyone else has more info let me know.
>
> On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 2:30:45 PM UTC-7, dan (ddpbsd) wrote:
>
>> I thought it was first come first served.
>> On Aug 1, 2012 5:26 PM, "cmlara" <> wrote:
>>
>>> 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 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 <> 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</**comman**d>
>>>> >> >     <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</**comman**d>
>>>> >> >     <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</**comman**d>
>>>> >> >     <location>defined_aget</**locati**on>
>>>> >> >     <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-**r**esponse/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-**r**esponse/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,
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>>
>>>

Reply via email to