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: [Snort-sigs] New adobe vulnerability |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:49:33 -0500 |
On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 10:37, nnposter@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Yes. Only uricontent is preprocessed with http_inspect. content and pcre are not.
Okay, so I would assume that all HTTP related rules should be crafted with [uri]content instead of pcre then..... to take advantage of the HTTP normalization by the preprocessor. In other words, pcre based rules would be easy to evade by various HTTP encodings, right? Cheers, Frank
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Snort-sigs] SID 2417, Paul Schmehl |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Snort-sigs] SID 2417, Nigel Houghton |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Snort-sigs] New adobe vulnerability, nnposter |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Snort-sigs] New adobe vulnerability, Matthew Watchinski |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |