From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail02.haj.ipfire.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail02.haj.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4fVLq35gcxz33gK for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 04:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail01.ipfire.org (mail01.haj.ipfire.org [172.28.1.202]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail01.haj.ipfire.org", Issuer "R12" (not verified)) by mail02.haj.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4fVLq02P47z2xLm for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 04:43:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail01.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4fVLpy4mfgzvw; Tue, 10 Mar 2026 04:43:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipfire.org; s=202003ed25519; t=1773117787; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Us89Qnw/3/pBdjHojgfGt0nUrOB2NLkMwBhCo263RIA=; b=QiH1r96jKPvbzhOP3R1vUSZLB5C7H0CDLt0hX6q5YR/zr6f2et3YTLhNcWoiq1aMeQgQNS eEDefaTJXGxzX1Aw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipfire.org; s=202003rsa; t=1773117787; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Us89Qnw/3/pBdjHojgfGt0nUrOB2NLkMwBhCo263RIA=; b=ec9umA7Qit64LnZ/5r2Z5Us2Zk3EFDGdsP/Vmr6xSmLzctuhbfoHTCsfnJ6Clx1P8l1Mhq mPSlDxegDFcB9FqXV2JXN0um+cAPsSSwsrnDzpXajuOwLRg9sh21Ot6BlLjFEYV1ZgsQCJ L3JIZU7wtdgrQtu83JRmZKYMaNtw127+U0SwHyUcFEy+h8P9nooZmn6VGZQHmtrRe/bxkd SNAN4RK2j87AQ3XM/PhprAXIBS/MTL+aYN/64VJAQbYP+teDPx5CMzOsoWUfGwnGiM6qJV cg5mu0Xg9TimZE6gnIR/r65R5nG+obpwWZ1fkMIqxyw2yugACx4I6oDnxn3xFA== From: Stefan Schantl To: Matthias Fischer , "IPFire: Development-List" Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2026 05:43:04 +0100 Message-ID: <19cd60e3fc0.27e7.cac9d3ffac9e24d09d20af05166fd73b@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: <5c23a258-3e27-4d84-a55d-4b24ff73770c@ipfire.org> References: <5c23a258-3e27-4d84-a55d-4b24ff73770c@ipfire.org> Subject: Re: ids.cgi: Exception list changes display order and something more... Precedence: list List-Id: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: Sender: Mail-Followup-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="19cd60e4209606627e716379a4" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --19cd60e4209606627e716379a4 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Good morning Matthias, thanks for your mail. I'll have a closer look at todays evening after my daily job and will report back. Best regards, -Stefan Am 9. März 2026 22:30:47 schrieb Matthias Fischer : > Hi, > > I found some strange things on the IPS system... > > First: > I defined five whitelisted hosts (or more, doesn't matter) on the > intrusion prevention page. > > Now every time I reload the page, the display order of these host list > changes. IP address and remark stick together but the order changes > every time I reload the page. As far as I saw it, the contents of > 'ignored' file stay the same. > > Second: > Furthermore, when I try to deactivate the last entry by removing the > check mark, the check mark disappears from the third entry (e.g.). When > I try to deactivate the third entry, check mark disappears from the last > (fifth). When I try to deactivate the second, check mark vanished from > the third... That means, most of the time the check mark disappears from > a different entry than the one I wanted to deselect. Weird... > > Third: > Last but not least: I can't deacivate single rules from the 'IPFire DBL > domain blocklists'. When I remove the check mark from the rule "IPFire > DBL [Malware] Blocked HTTP Request", the mark is back after reloading > the ruleset. I can't disable individual rules, only the entire rule set. > > Can anyone confirm these findings? > > Best > Matthias --19cd60e4209606627e716379a4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Good morning Matthias,

<= div dir=3D"auto">thanks for your mail.

I'll have a closer look at todays evening after my daily job= and will report back.

B= est regards,

-Stefan

Am 9. M=C3=A4rz 2026 22:30:47 schrieb Matthias Fischer &l= t;matthias.fischer@ipfire.org>:

Hi,

I found some strange things on the IPS system...

First:
I defined five whitelisted hosts (or more, doesn't matter= ) on the
intrusion prevention page.

Now every time I reload the page, the display order of th= ese host list
changes. IP address and remark stick together but the ord= er changes
every time I reload the page. As far as I saw it, the con= tents of
'ignored' file stay the same.

Second:
Furthermore, when I try to deactivate the last entry by r= emoving the
check mark, the check mark disappears from the third entr= y (e.g.). When
I try to deactivate the third entry, check mark disappear= s from the last
(fifth). When I try to deactivate the second, check mark = vanished from
the third... That means, most of the time the check mark = disappears from
a different entry than the one I wanted to deselect. Weir= d...

Third:
Last but not least: I can't deacivate single rules from t= he 'IPFire DBL
domain blocklists'. When I remove the check mark from the= rule "IPFire
DBL [Malware] Blocked HTTP Request", the mark is back aft= er reloading
the ruleset. I can't disable individual rules, only the e= ntire rule set.

Can anyone confirm these findings?

Best
Matthias

--19cd60e4209606627e716379a4--