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: | Sat, 08 Jan 2005 14:08:21 +0200 |
Gadi,
Thanks very much for your detailed response. I understand their definition of 100% accuracy but it still begs the question as to how they make the initial determination of what to track or not. Surely
they don't send their crafted data on every single connection to see if it comes back. Their web site states that ActiveScout is looking for recon activity so some threshold or "trigger" must exist for them to differentiate recon from legitimate traffic.
Exactly.
Their site also states that they're not signature based. Again, if they have some sort of logic based on thresholds (x amount of TCP packets per minute from the same source IP, etc.), it sounds like a signature to me. At least I know that Cisco, ISS, etc. all have threshold-based signatures in their IDS products.
All that aside, I saw the results of a SuperScan port scan that included a bunch of junk caused by ActiveScout. I would think that feeding an attacker a bunch of info that leads them to believe that you're really vulnerable is not a great idea (like open SunRPC ports, NetBIOS, etc.). I want less attention,
not more. I suspect that anything out-of-the-ordinary would perhaps cause more attention. This is sort of a honeypot idea gone berserk. Instead of one host appearing vulnerable, all of your hosts appear vulnerable.
Anyway, it doesn't sound like it buys much, if anything, over "traditional" IDS/IPS.
Gadi.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test Your IDS
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: ForeScout ActiveScout, dywzh dywzh |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: ForeScout ActiveScout, Brent Stackhouse |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: ForeScout ActiveScout, Brent Stackhouse |
| Next by Thread: | RE: ForeScout ActiveScout, Carey, Steve T GARRISON |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |