To stay updated on your favorite discussions, please create an account or log in. Then, click the Bookmark icon to subscribe and receive notifications.

Policy Manager - Java High Memory and CPU Usage

Marc Peters
Marc Peters Posts: 17 Cyber Knight
in Business Suite

We have upgraded our PM to 12.40 and since we have the Java CPU is running at 96% and 2.2GB of Memory.

 

I have restarted the server and it has not helped.

 

Windows Server 2012 R2

2 x CPU

8GB Memory

 

Any ideas?

Comments

  • Marc Peters
    Marc Peters Posts: 17 Cyber Knight

    Anyone? This is making the PM unusable.

  • 1lI
    1lI Posts: 2 Security Scout

    We have the same problem.

    Server 2012 Standard.

     

  • pelletierromain
    pelletierromain Posts: 2 Security Scout

    I have same problem since upgrade to 12.40 on 2008 R2

    CPU = 4 vCPU

    MEM = 4 Gb

     

  • Marc Peters
    Marc Peters Posts: 17 Cyber Knight

    I'm glad I'm not the only one.

     

    I did log a call with FSecure Support 2 days ago but have not heard anything.

     

     

  • Janne_M
    Janne_M Posts: 2 Security Scout

    Same problem after 12.40 update.
    2012 R2 Hyper-V Host.

  • pelletierromain
    pelletierromain Posts: 2 Security Scout

    I've the problem since the upgrade on 31 May.

    After discover the problem i've upgraded java to 1.8.0_131

     

    Just open a support request today.

  • A_Grinkevitch
    A_Grinkevitch Posts: 169 Threat Terminator

    Thank you for your feedback. R&D guys are investigating provided data and we are trying to reproduce CPU load inhouse. Will update you with results once have any.
    As a common notice in provided data, some affected PM instances have huge amount of Application control rules. What we can suggest at the moment is reducing the number of policy rules for unknown apps to keep only those which do not match the default action, or clean "Application Control Rules" table (OID 1.3.6.1.4.1.2213.25.1.40.20) completely. As we see in provided data, most of customers define rules to Allow for Client apps and Deny for Server ones. So, set these actions as default ones and remove all rules with same permission combination. Of course, you can set your defaults to any you prefer. Reducing the number of rules will decrease policy size and improve overall Server performance and Console responsiveness.
    Also noticed that some of affected VMs running Policy Manager have a single CPU while we recommend at least two. Please increase CPUs accordingly.

  • Janne_M
    Janne_M Posts: 2 Security Scout

    Thank you for the quick answer.

     

    I cleaned up the "Application Control Rules" table. It contained 6100 rows in total, most of then unnecessary.

     

    It helped with the High CPU problem after waiting for a while.

     

    But now Client Security Premium 12.31 has this different line and OID number in the LogFile.log file:

     

    158 2017-06-06 20:51:50+03:00 -- --\-- F-Secure Management Agent 1.3.6.1.4.1.2213.11.1.15
    F-Secure Management Agent failed in an internal operation. Setting the policy variable 1.3.6.1.4.1.2213.12.1.111.2.100.100.50 (error=-505) was not successful. If the problem persists, please contact the system administrator.

     

    Does this tell anything else for you?

     

    Is this OID in any way related to this problem?

  • MJ-perComp
    MJ-perComp Posts: 669 Firewall Master

    With modern Hypervisors there is no need to define such low limits.

     

    If installed on a Windows Server OS:

    2 Cores/vCPUs is ok for a System dedicated to PMS. But as soon as you run the console (PMC) on the same system and/or access it remotely (e.g. via RDS)  the system is likely to suffer from CPU usage when signature updates arrive and need to be imported.


    Also the additionaly recommended F-Server Security will influence CPU performance.

     

    Finally: the new proxy for SWUP,  (and later ORSP) will raise CPU usage.

     

    I promote to raise minimum to 3 cores/vCPUs for Windows based PMS and recommended 4 cores/vCPUs.

  • 1lI
    1lI Posts: 2 Security Scout

    Clearing the Application Control list and then rebooting helped with the CPU usage issue.

    Also, policy-based client security upgrades and .msi packet exporting started working again.

    We had 34000+ lines of mostly obsolete weight in the App Control list...

     

  • tomczaki
    tomczaki Posts: 15 Security Scout

    I have same problem since upgrade to 12.40 on 2012 R2, Java 8u131

    CPU = 4 vCPU

    MEM = 8 Gb

    Now I've uninstall Java 8u131 and reinstal FSPMS12.40 - it help for 10-20 minutes. 

    Curently after system start CPU goes to 70-90% Java Platform SEbinary process (no Java installed so its probebly from FSPMS enviroment)

    Status Monitor is showing HTTP/HTTP/Webreporting: The operation timeout

     

    Cant login to server, cant delete policies

  • A_Grinkevitch
    A_Grinkevitch Posts: 169 Threat Terminator

    Good news!

    Janne_M, message "Setting the policy variable 1.3.6.1.4.1.2213.12.1.111.2.100.100.50 (error=-505) was not successful" is caused by "Disallow user changes" checkbox for the specified policy. Seems like UI editor at the client ignores this flag and allows to add exclusions, but as expected can not save the policies with specified error as a side effect.

  • A_Grinkevitch
    A_Grinkevitch Posts: 169 Threat Terminator

    tomczaki, PM is distributed with java inside so even no need to install it separately.

    CPU goes to 100% once client requests policy generation. To avoid that, make sure clients do not reach PM after the service start, for instance stop the network interface or change host module ports. Clean app control rules, distribute policies and revert network changes back. If you stopped the network interface, even no need to restart PM service once network is back, but port changes require restart.

  • aimutch
    aimutch Member Posts: 28 Junior Protector

    Is there a plan to release an updated installer that incorporates the hot fix? 

  • A_Grinkevitch
    A_Grinkevitch Posts: 169 Threat Terminator

    aimutch, no, full service release is not planned.

  • andrzej
    andrzej Posts: 48 Junior Protector

    Any chance you coudl re-release the 12.40 installer with the embedded patch. Just to avoid confusion and forcing people to update just freshly released software version.

    You can ignore my post, I have not seen your reply to the identical request.
    I don't see an option to remove once posted reply

This discussion has been closed.

Categories