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.




Network Security Snort-Signatures
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Snort-sigs] Reducing FPs by linking attacks to service versions

Subject: Re: [Snort-sigs] Reducing FPs by linking attacks to service versions
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 10:01:00 -0500
root wrote:

I have just been playing with flowbits, and am wondering if there would be 
adverse effects to linking rules to specific service version where applicable.



I think that's a great idea. The snag may be making sure your research is good on some of the sigs, and being certain that it affects only a certain version.

A potential problem would be any versions of servers that the version string has been altered, as many people do with apache servers, etc. This would have to be an optional modification. Probably not something we could put in the mail sets of rules. At Bleeding snort I generally prefer to have the default set of rules work for as many situations as possible and local changes can be made to further customize.

I think it'd be worth it to have a secoind set of rules that are modified in this way, so that if you knew you hadn't altered the version string on any of your servers then you could run those rules.

I am curious about the performance impacts. Can any of the snort folks comment on whether this would cause a significant load increase?

Very good idea.

Matt

Simple example

alert tcp $HTTP_SERVERS $HTTP_PORTS -> any any \
(msg:"IS IIS4"; sid:2000000; \
rev:0; classtype:not-suspicious; \
content: "Server\: Microsoft-IIS\/4.0"; \
flowbits: set,isiis4; \
flowbits: noalert;)

Alert tcp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HTTP_SERVERS $HTTP_PORTS \
(msg:"New IIS4 fpcount attempt"; \
sid:2000002; rev:0; classtype:web-application-attack; \
flow:to_server,established; \ uricontent:"/fpcount.exe"; \
content:"Digits="; nocase; reference:bugtraq,2252; reference:cve,1999-1376; \
flowbits: isset,isiis4;)



How much of a resource hit would there be on a system to track connections in this way?

-N





-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
_______________________________________________
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>