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] False positive for rule 1:1365 |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 23 Sep 2004 23:37:46 -0400 |
Hi Worthy, Actually this rule contains a ton of false positives. For example a webpage with the word "form" follows by a space , where space equals %20, will trigger it. The trick here is to first make sure all your HTTP_SERVERS and HTTP_PORTS variables are set. From your post it looks like you may have this done all ready. Ok now this is where it can get tricky. Make a new variable say HTTP_SERVERS_GOOD where every server IP in this variable is known to have security settings and patches to prevent/harden against the exploit of the vulnerability for sig 1365. (See snort.org for rule details.) Next we make a huge assumption that you will have to test. We assume that only web traffic on your network flows on the HTTP_PORTS you have designated. You will have to test this and either beat some people for using Peer-to-Peer or glare threatingly at those using none standard ports for their applications. This will depend on your security polices for your environment. If more than just web traffic flows on your HTTP_PORTS then these changes will not work, or not work well. Now create a copy of the rule (with a new sig #) and replace the $HTTP_SERVERS with !$HTTP_SERVERS_GOOD. This will allow the rule to trigger when ever it sees a packet containing the potential exploit travel on your web ports to a machine that is NOT known to be secure against this exploit. This way if a new server comes online that you haven't verified the rule won't miss it. Once you have verified it you can add the IP to the GOOD variable. Your mileage will with these changes will depend on your network. I always recommend turning rules off as an absolute last resort, but sometimes its inevitable. Most times you can get creative though. Hope this helps or maybe leads to a different idea that may help you. Shawn Truax Sr. Security Specialist Corporate Security 155 University Ave. Toronto, Ontario M5H 3B7 (416)327-1107 -----Original Message----- From: Worthy [mailto:listy@home.olsztyn.pl] Sent: September 23, 2004 6:54 PM To: snort-sigs@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Snort-sigs] False positive for rule 1:1365 Hello, I found false positive for rule 1:1365 it looks like this: GET /pphlogger.php?id=[id]&referer=http%3A//www.domain.com.pl/%3F6%26 &r=1024x768&c=32&showme=n&st=js&title=Dystrybucja%20maszyn%20rolniczych %20firm%20McCormick%2C%20Laverda%2C%20Kverneland%2C%20Manitou%20i%20 HTTP/1.1 this innocent request contain string rm%20 can rule may be changed to avoid such false positives? or the only solution is to remove that rule? -- Best regards, Worthy mailto: listy@home.olsztyn.pl ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php _______________________________________________ Snort-sigs mailing list Snort-sigs@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-sigs
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Snort-sigs] False positive for rule 1:1365, Worthy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Snort-sigs] edonkey rules, Chich Thierry |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Snort-sigs] False positive for rule 1:1365, Mike Pomraning |
| Next by Thread: | [Snort-sigs] edonkey rules, Chich Thierry |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |