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] Preproc tuning |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 17 Jun 2005 16:21:37 -0400 |
In both cases, it does exactly the same thing in the code. and this happens when snort starts. so i dont understand if there is a performance difference. might be something else that is causing the performance difference On 6/17/05, Joel Esler <eslerj@gmail.com> wrote:
I know what it does. What I am saying is, if you specify them in the .conf file, as opposed to letting the compiled code do it, is it faster? In my tests it's showing significant CPU performance increase.. J On 6/17/05, snort user <snort.user@gmail.com> wrote:Those are the default ports for which state tracking/reassembly is done if you dont specify anything in the snort.conf # ports [list] - use the space separated list of ports in [list], "all" # will turn on reassembly for all ports, "default" will turn # on reassembly for ports 21, 23, 25, 53, 80, 143, 110, 111 # and 513 On 6/17/05, Joel Esler <eslerj@gmail.com> wrote:Has anyone else noticed a significant performance increase by specifying the ports for stream4? If I look at the code for stream 4, take the ports that are in there. and specify them via the snort.conf ports: < 21 23 25 53 42 80 110 111 143 513 >....etc.. It is SO much faster and doesn't consume as much CPU resources... anyone? ------------------------------------------------------- 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_idt77&alloc_id492&opclick _______________________________________________ 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?listsnort-users
------------------------------------------------------- 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_idt77&alloc_id492&opÌk _______________________________________________ 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
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Snort-users] Preproc tuning, Joel Esler |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Snort-users] Preproc tuning, Joel Esler |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Snort-users] Preproc tuning, Joel Esler |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Snort-users] Preproc tuning, Joel Esler |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |