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.




Network Security Snort-Users
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Snort-users] Preproc tuning

Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Preproc tuning
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 16:24:17 -0400
could be.  I made a change to the rpc processor too, but that wouldn't
cause a performance increase.  interesting.

On 6/17/05, snort user <snort.user@gmail.com> wrote:
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>