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] SSH brute force attack sig |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 07 Jul 2005 10:52:26 -0500 |
Nigel Houghton wrote:
True, but we're still not able to use those events to respond or block.You seem rather set on this course of action. I do not think that an automated response to portscans is a very wise idea at all. But that's just my $0.02.
I agree. That's why I use these specific sigs. I'd never really *want* to block or respond based on sfportscan info, it's just too unreliable. There are times where legit traffic trips it, and no tuning can fix that without causing false negatives, as far as I've ever played with it at least. Maybe the next iteration of portscan could incorporate the ability to set different thresholds for ports or ranges? That would help, but the output still needs to be more useful. We need to be able to specify a response based on the ports hit, that really keeps us in the individual sig solution. How much of an impact does a sig like this have on performance Nigel? I had always assumed it was pretty minimal. It's using flow and a threshold, so never even has to go into the payload for a content match. but it does have to keep state in the threshold. Matt -------------------------------------------- Matthew Jonkman, CISSP Senior Security Engineer Infotex 765-429-0398 Direct Anytime 765-448-6847 Office 866-679-5177 24x7 NOC my.infotex.com www.offsitefilter.com www.bleedingsnort.com -------------------------------------------- NOTICE: The information contained in this email is confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient. Any use, distribution, transmittal or retransmittal of information contained in this email by persons who are not intended recipients may be a violation of law and is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click _______________________________________________ Snort-sigs mailing list Snort-sigs@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-sigs
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Snort-sigs] SSH brute force attack sig, Jeff Kell |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Snort-sigs] SSH brute force attack sig, Paul Schmehl |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Snort-sigs] SSH brute force attack sig, Nigel Houghton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Snort-sigs] SSH brute force attack sig, Jeff Kell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |