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: Vulnerability vs. Exploit signatures and IPS?? |
|---|---|
| Date: | Wed, 18 May 2005 15:47:47 -0400 |
A vulnerability is typically disclosed before an exploit exists to take advantage of it. From this disclosure it can be possible to create a signature that would fire when the conditions are met that would exploit the vulnerability. For example, a vulnerability may exist in a particular service that doesn't check parameter sizes correctly, allowing a buffer overflow. No known exploit exists, but it is possible for an application to monitor the size of the parameter passed to that service, and if it is of sufficient size to exploit the vulnerability, then block or alarm. Once an exploit is released, it will typically have a more specific set of conditions that can be monitored - perhaps a particular byte sequence, string, padding or a specific parameter size. If those specific conditions are met, then a specific alarm can be raised for that named exploit. Most modern IPS/IDS employ both "vulnerability signatures" and "exploit signatures". Vulnerability signatures can be written sooner, but are less specific, and can be prone to false positives (it's hard to anticipate every possible violation of the standard that might be legitimate, but resemble the attack) as well as false negatives (it's not always possible to create an accurate vulnerability pattern that catches every possible method of exploit). Exploit signatures come after the fact, but are typically more accurate. Jason -- Jason Anderson Director of Engineering and Product Management janderson@lancope.com http://www.lancope.com -----Original Message----- From: Jacob Winston [mailto:jctx09@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 10:58 PM To: focus-ids@securityfocus.com Subject: Vulnerability vs. Exploit signatures and IPS?? Can someone explain to me the difference in writing signatures based on Vulnerabilities versus writing signatures based on Exploits? TippingPoint makes a claim that their IPS is better because they write signatures based on Vulnerabilities and not exploits. I don't quite understand this. Thank you, ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- 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: IDS ISS, Palmer, Paul (ISSAtlanta) |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Vulnerability vs. Exploit signatures and IPS??, Ed Gibbs |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Vulnerability vs. Exploit signatures and IPS??, Andrew Plato |
| Next by Thread: | Release of Honeywall CDROM 'Roo', Lance Spitzner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |