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: | [Snort-sigs] rules vs. thresholding |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, 19 Mar 2005 14:46:27 -0500 |
Hello everyone, I just wrote a bunch of rules to watch for traffic with invalid IP addresses (in private network space). To jump over my own smaller network (/26) it took about 21 rules (including 1 each for 172.16/12 and 192.168/16) But my question is this: Would it have been better to simply write SUPPRESS rules and specify my network in track by_src and track by_dst, or to keep these many rules that include every private network except my own. To clarify, my question has more to do with what is more CPU intensive or more likely to cause dropped packets, etc... (having a lot of packets alert and then get suppressed, or a lot of rules that aren't triggered very often). Thanks :) ------------------------------------------------------- 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://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ 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] Bleedingsnort.com Daily Update, bleeding |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Snort-sigs] Another false positive - sid:2435, Jason |
| Previous by Thread: | [Snort-sigs] Another false positive - sid:2435, Paul Schmehl |
| Next by Thread: | [Snort-sigs] Snort Rules reply, Kenneth Lobato Lastra (Halkon) |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |