Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: ForeScout ActiveScout |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 7 Jan 2005 14:56:35 -0600 |
We tested it for a while, only had partial use of it, because it is designed to connect to the manufacture (in Israel) to use the tracking and map feature, and the subnet was one we had blocked. We decided it wasn't something we could use, even though it does have some possibilities. Steve Carey -----Original Message----- From: Brent Stackhouse [mailto:brentstackhouse@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 9:14 PM To: focus-ids@securityfocus.com Subject: ForeScout ActiveScout Hello, Just a quick question on ForeScout ActiveScout as to whether anyone out there has used/eval'd it. I'm working with a client that is using an old version (2.7.x, I believe), is considering an upgrade, and I'm not sure it's worth the time and effort. They claim 100% accuracy which we all know is silly. Their whole methodology is based on an attacker using recon in advance of an attack and that the recon activity is detectable enough to start interfering with it.
From what I can gather from ForeScout's literature and the management
console of the app itself, when it's able to run at all (Java-based,
slow as dirt), this product sits on the outside of the perimeter and
looks for suspicious traffic via a span session. When it detects scans
or similar recon activity, it can both send back spurious information to
the source IP and update a firewall to block it. It seems to track
attacking IP's based on the spurious info it already fed them.
Also, this version doesn't seem to track SMTP and DNS, two of the most
oft-attacked protocols out there.
Having run one or two firewalls and NIDS setups myself, I'm not clear on
the benefit of this beast compared to either inline IPS or IDS plus
firewall blocking (or a firewall and patched servers, while I'm going
that way).
Stupid question - if my perimeter devices, including DMZ servers, are
patched, why the heck would I want to send back _any_ data to an
attacker? I guess if your servers weren't patchable for some reason,
maybe you'd want to fake that they really are. Um, okay.
Probably better ways to handle that. I would think that if my perimeter
is properly locked-down, I'm quite happy for an attacker to scan it and
figure that out for themselves - assuming they get much of a scan past
IPS/IDS/firewall.
What am I missing? Thanks for the feedback.
Brent Stackhouse, GSEC/GCIH, etc.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Test Your IDS
Is your IDS deployed correctly?
Find out quickly and easily by testing it with real-world attacks from
CORE IMPACT.
Go to http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/CoreSecurity_focus-ids_040708
to learn more.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Your IDS
Is your IDS deployed correctly?
Find out quickly and easily by testing it with real-world attacks from
CORE IMPACT.
Go to http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/CoreSecurity_focus-ids_040708
to learn more.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: IPS with no IP address?, nick black |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: ForeScout ActiveScout, Gadi Evron |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: ForeScout ActiveScout, Gadi Evron |
| Next by Thread: | Re: ForeScout ActiveScout, dywzh dywzh |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |