| Summary: | IPS blocks Cloudflare DNS traffic over time | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | IPFire | Reporter: | Wayne <mentalic> |
| Component: | --- | Assignee: | Stefan Schantl <stefan.schantl> |
| Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | Major Usability | ||
| Priority: | Will affect most users | CC: | ipfb, michael.tremer, peter.mueller, stefan.schantl |
| Version: | 2 | ||
| Hardware: | all | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| See Also: | https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12087 | ||
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 12052, 12108 | ||
|
Description
Wayne
2019-05-13 19:22:34 UTC
More info: -Noticed that rDNS is indicating failed on Status>Network gui when I cannot access some sites. Cannot ping by name ipfire.org for example. -Disabling IPS on Red interface restores rDNS status to normal. Then Web browser works as does ping by name to ipfire.org. I'm using Cloudfare's 1.1.1.1/1.0.0.1 DNS Regards Wayne Hey Wayne, we need to find out if you have some rules there that are blocking any traffic. I cannot imagine that the IPS itself would be losing packets. I haven't seen that before. So what is in fast.log and what is in stats.log? Michael, Nothing in the fast.log for the period after I stop start the IPS until I cannot access some sites. Lots of stuff in the stats.log, not sure what I'm looking at here. Counter | TM Name | Value ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ decoder.pkts | Total | 1721 decoder.bytes | Total | 457405 decoder.ipv4 | Total | 1721 decoder.tcp | Total | 1085 decoder.udp | Total | 514 decoder.icmpv4 | Total | 122 decoder.avg_pkt_size | Total | 265 decoder.max_pkt_size | Total | 1500 flow.tcp | Total | 227 flow.udp | Total | 261 flow.icmpv4 | Total | 1 tcp.sessions | Total | 225 tcp.invalid_checksum | Total | 1 tcp.syn | Total | 349 tcp.synack | Total | 487 tcp.rst | Total | 2 tcp.pkt_on_wrong_thread | Total | 377 app_layer.flow.dns_udp | Total | 254 app_layer.tx.dns_udp | Total | 254 app_layer.flow.failed_udp | Total | 7 ips.accepted | Total | 1234 ips.blocked | Total | 489 flow_mgr.new_pruned | Total | 186 flow_mgr.est_pruned | Total | 190 flow.spare | Total | 10000 flow_mgr.flows_checked | Total | 2 flow_mgr.flows_notimeout | Total | 2 flow_mgr.rows_checked | Total | 65536 flow_mgr.rows_skipped | Total | 65529 flow_mgr.rows_empty | Total | 5 flow_mgr.rows_maxlen | Total | 1 tcp.memuse | Total | 2293760 tcp.reassembly_memuse | Total | 196608 dns.memuse | Total | 6656 flow.memuse | Total | 7269568 (In reply to Wayne from comment #3) > app_layer.flow.dns_udp | Total | > 254 > app_layer.tx.dns_udp | Total | > 254 > app_layer.flow.failed_udp | Total | 7 Stefan, do you think this line could suggest dropped DNS requests? Switched DNS provider from Cloudfair to Verisign and problems has been resolved. Hmm, very interesting. I will close this ticket then and maybe someone will re-open if they have the same issue. Perhaps a different ticket for why Cloudfare no longer works. Others on the forum are seeing the same problem with Cloudfare + IPS enabled blocks some sites. (In reply to Wayne from comment #7) > Perhaps a different ticket for why Cloudfare no longer works. Others on the > forum are seeing the same problem with Cloudfare + IPS enabled blocks some > sites. Yes, I can confirm. A customer had the same issue. Nothing in the logs. The workaround is not to use Cloudflare. I have a follow up on this: We have failed to receive some emails on our IPFire mail server. The reason for that was, that the connection was interrupted by Suricata after the DATA command only for emails that came in without TLS. Those emails also needed to have an attachment. There was a rule in our ruleset activated that would have filtered this, but nothing has been logged. We have a preprocessor for DNS and SMTP. I *think* that there might be a chance that when the preprocessor finds a problem in a packet, that it won't be logged when it is dropped. The fast.log kind seems to be incomplete. But I could not set up the EVE logging kind - probably because our Suricata is compiled without support for JSON. This is quite a serious issue now and debugging it is quite hard. The only solution is to disable suricata entirely which is a security risk now. Also see https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12087 which is kind of similar to this problem. Hello Wayne, is this issue still present with core update 133 ? Thanks in advance, -Stefan Hi Stefan Just checked by switching DNS to Cloudfares 1.1.1.1/1.0.0.1. Yes the problem still is present in core update 133. Sites work initially but go back 30min later and seemingly random sites no longer work. Regards Wayne I can confirm this bug is still valid using other DNS servers as well. There are also some ICMP issues here (Nagios check_ping does not work), so I guess things might be related to Suricata preprocessors dropping packages. Trying to investigate here over the weekend, let me know if there is something to test. :-) Hello guys, can I ask you to investigate this all again. I am not sure what we know about this problem and what we do not know. However, this problem is still affecting a large number of users and I would be happy to ship a fix with the next Core Update so that enabling the IPS does not have any unwanted side-effects any more. As far as I am concerned, this was caused by a kernel bug and affected much more than just Cloudflare DNS. It will be fixed in upcoming Core Update 137: https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=commit;h=415969cc1b8edd06ee84375614c4eb06cf182d36 Please refer to https://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/2019-September/006244.html for mailing list conversation on this. Loaded up 137 version IPFire 2.23 (x86_64) - Development Build: master/f48920d8 Can confirm cloudfare DNS still fails reverse lookup, some sites do not load. (In reply to Wayne from comment #16) > Can confirm cloudfare DNS still fails reverse lookup, some sites do not load. Reverse lookup? Can you explain? This wasn't mentioned here before... Reverse lookup? Can you explain? This wasn't mentioned here before... See comment #1 rDNS fails. (In reply to Wayne from comment #18) > Reverse lookup? Can you explain? This wasn't mentioned here before... Okay, I get you. Why would these be any different than regular DNS queries? Is this bug still valid? I cannot say for certain, but some people have confirmed that this works okay now.
> https://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/2019-December/006743.html
|