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-users] Port scans detected behind Firewall? |
|---|---|
| Date: | Mon, 13 Jun 2005 17:18:40 -0400 |
James Bruce wrote:
Hello,
I'm not sure this is the right place to ask this but I have a
another newb question. I don't fully understand how this is happening.
We have a Cisco pix 515 firewall, with all incoming ports closed and
some outbound ports open (80,25 etc..) We also have snort and squid
installed on a W2K server with a single interface behind the firewall.
All network users use the squid proxy for internet access. Snort is
picking up port scans from outside ip addresses. My question is how are
these sites port scanning my proxy server? I know some of these port
scans are from audio streaming sites looking for a hole but shouldn't
the firewall stop these port scans from reaching the proxy?? I'm sure
I'm missing something simple here. Please post your thoughts. Thank you
James
Here is the snort log: 192.168.0.6 is our proxy. Snort's threshold value
for # or ports is set to 20.
Unfortunately in my experience portscan2 has a big problem distinguishing between a port scan and a client opening a website with a lot of images when you start dropping packets. Use kill -USR1 to force snort to log it's stats and check your packet drop rate. If you want to use portscan2 without lots FPs, that number has to be very close to 0%. If it misses the outgoing syn's portscan2 often sees all the syn-acks coming back from the webserver as a syn-ack scan, instead of responses to legitimate requests. That explains the TCP scans being sourced from port 80. You can verify it yourself, pick any website with a lot of images on it and you should trigger a "scan" as soon as you open it. The same basic effect happens with DNS lookups, but they show up as being UDP packets sourced from port 53. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games. How far can you shotput a projector? How fast can you ride your desk chair down the office luge track? If you want to score the big prize, get to know the little guy. Play to win an NEC 61" plasma display: http://www.necitguy.com/?r=20 _______________________________________________ Snort-users mailing list Snort-users@lists.sourceforge.net Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users Snort-users list archive: http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=snort-users
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Snort-users] Port scans detected behind Firewall?, James Bruce |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Snort-users] BASE 1.1.3 release, Kevin Johnson |
| Previous by Thread: | [Snort-users] Port scans detected behind Firewall?, James Bruce |
| Next by Thread: | [Snort-users] BASE 1.1.3 release, Kevin Johnson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |