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] Basic question [] syntax question about excluding a subnet of a larger subnet... |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:50:27 -0500 |
Gentoo-Wally wrote:
Question... What is the correct way to exclude a subnet from a larger network in a signature?
You have to define it as multiple subnet additions. You can't subtract out a range that's already been added, because the behavior of a , is an "or" operation, not an AND.
var NET1 10.0.0.0/8 <http://10.0.0.0/8> var NET2 10.7.0.0/16 <http://10.7.0.0/16> var NET3 10.14.0.0/16 <http://10.14.0.0/16> alert tcp [$NET1,!$NET2] ANY -> $NET3 ANY ...blah, blah, blah... Is that the right way to watch for something from NET1 but not in NET2
No. That won't work, you can't do subtraction. [$NET1,!$NET2] will match anything in NET1 *OR* anything not in NET2. Since net2 is a subset of net1 this makes it a logical equivalent to "any". The first clause will match all of net1, *including* the IPs in net2. The second clause will match all of the rest of IP space. As long as either clause is satisfied, it's a match. And it has to work this way, unless the syntax changes to allow substantially more complex expressions. If the existing , became an "AND" operation things like [10.0.0.1/32,10.0.0.2/32] would not work correctly. That would suddenly become a match of nothing, instead of a match of either of two IPs. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ 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] Basic question [] syntax question about excluding a subnet of a larger subnet..., Gentoo-Wally |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Snort-sigs] Basic question [] syntax question about excluding a subnet of a larger subnet..., Lorine Ruotolo |
| Previous by Thread: | [Snort-sigs] Basic question [] syntax question about excluding a subnet of a larger subnet..., Gentoo-Wally |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Snort-sigs] Basic question [] syntax question about excluding a subnet of a larger subnet..., Lorine Ruotolo |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |