Thanks for finding that. If I haven't already, I'll update the docs.

On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 7:46 AM, c0by <jake....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did some more testing, and I am happy to say I believe this issue is
> SOLVED!
>
> The issue is that the repeated offenders configuration needs to be on
> the *agents* ossec.conf file, and *not* in the servers ossec.conf. I
> believe you could have it on both so it is used for both the server
> and agent. It can't go in the agent.conf currently which would of been
> nice, but it's fine for now.
>
> For more details on this see my post on this solution here:
> http://www.mebsd.com/freebsd-security-hardening/solved-ossec-repeated-offenders-ignored.html
>
> Regards
> Jake
>
> On Dec 17, 4:57 am, Chris Warren <chris.war...@netelligent.ca> wrote:
>> Good find!  Thank you!
>>
>> Unfortunately the source is still a little over my head...just meaning that 
>> I don't have the time to right now to get in and learn.
>>
>> But I work regularly with a couple of different ossec server/agent groups 
>> for different clients, and can definitely help to test any code patches, 
>> and/or help with any diagnostic testing.
>>
>> I'd love to see this feature work, but it is by no means a deal-breaker for 
>> me.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "jake 22s" <jake....@gmail.com>
>> To: ossec-list@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 6:09:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ossec-list] Repeated Offenders not triggering
>>
>> I can confirm that repeated_offenders *does* work on a local only install.
>>
>> I too run an agent / server setup with blocks going to all agents. With this 
>> setup repeated_offenders does *not* work. It says it's loaded in the start 
>> up log but it is ignored and the default ar timeout is always used.
>>
>> So going by your suggestion, I installed a fresh local only ossec install on 
>> a development server and it does indeed work.
>>
>> Looks like some code must be missing from the agent only build perhaps. Not 
>> done much testing yet, but will do more later and have a read through the 
>> source.
>>
>> Any of the developers know much about this?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chris Warren <chris.war...@netelligent.ca>
>> Sender: ossec-list@googlegroups.com
>> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:41:38
>> To: <ossec-list@googlegroups.com>
>> Reply-To: ossec-list@googlegroups.com
>> Subject: Re: [ossec-list] Repeated Offenders not triggering
>>
>> Could be that it's only working for local setups currently?  I am using 
>> server/agent, with active responses triggering blocks on all servers.
>>
>> Even so, I repeated abused 1 single server and could not get the 
>> repeated_offenders timeout to trigger.
>>
>> Anybody with a local install that can test this, or has it working?
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "jake 22s" <jake....@gmail.com>
>> To: ossec-list@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 6:56:47 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ossec-list] Repeated Offenders not triggering
>>
>> Moving the repeated_offenders to its own block did not work for me. I don't 
>> see anything in the log on start either.
>>
>> Is this feature confirmed as working? Just doesn't seem to have many docs 
>> for it, would be a nice feature to use.
>>
>> Jake
>> Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chris Warren <chris.war...@netelligent.ca>
>> Sender: ossec-list@googlegroups.com
>> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:55:40
>> To: <ossec-list@googlegroups.com>
>> Reply-To: ossec-list@googlegroups.com
>> Subject: Re: [ossec-list] Repeated Offenders not triggering
>>
>> Sometimes I see the same host blocked every 600 seconds (the timeout value).
>>
>> I tried adding the repeated_offenders list to it's own block as the 
>> documentation suggested, but then I do not see:
>>
>> 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 30 (for #1)
>> 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 60 (for #2)
>> 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 120 (for #3)
>> 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 1440 (for 
>> #4)
>>
>> I will be doing some more testing as well, and will report back if I find a 
>> solution.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "dan (ddp)" <ddp...@gmail.com>
>> To: ossec-list@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 3:46:23 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ossec-list] Repeated Offenders not triggering
>>
>> Based onhttp://dcid.me/2011/02/blocking-repeated-offenders-with-ossec/
>> I think the repeated_offenders list should be in its own block.
>> Example:
>>
>> <active-response>
>>   <command>firewall-drop</command>
>>   <location>all</location>
>>   <level>7</level>
>>   <timeout>600</timeout>
>> </active-response>
>> <active-response>
>>   <repeated_offenders>30,60,120,1440</repeated_offenders>
>> </active-response>
>>
>> Again, I'm not sure and I don't know how easy this will be for me to test.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Chris Warren
>> <chris.war...@netelligent.ca> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > I'm am trying out the <repeated_offenders> option but it does not seem to 
>> > be triggering.
>>
>> > Here is my active response config:
>> >  <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>7</level>
>> >    <timeout>600</timeout>
>> >    <repeated_offenders>30,60,120,1440</repeated_offenders>
>> >  </active-response>
>>
>> > I also get this when restarting OSSEC:
>> > 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 30 (for 
>> > #1)
>> > 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 60 (for 
>> > #2)
>> > 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 120 (for 
>> > #3)
>> > 2011/12/12 19:39:15 ossec-execd: INFO: Adding offenders timeout: 1440 (for 
>> > #4)
>>
>> > So all appears well, however, I am seeing the same offender being 
>> > unblocked after 600 seconds each time.
>>
>> > Thanks for any help offered.
>>
>> > Chris

Reply via email to