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] Quick questions about recieved packets |
|---|---|
| Date: | Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:25:18 -0500 |
I was afraid of that. I have snort plugged into a Cisco 3560G Switch on a mirrored port. I am mirroring 10 other ports on the switch currently. This is my core switch and brings about 5 different network segments together. I am using the Official Snort Rules and the Bleeding Snort Rules. Snort is setup to kick out the Alerts via Syslog. The local Syslog function in Linux is setup to send the Alerts to a Syslog appliance that parses all of my logs for me. For testing I setup Snort to output Alerts via unified logging and that didn't help any. I currently have both Tx and Rx being mirrored to my monitoring port. I tried just Tx and just Rx and got the same result. The monitor port is a Gigabit port and the monitoring ethernet port is running at a Gigabit also. On the linux appliance that port is running in promiscuous mode and has no IP. I have a management interface on the box also that I use to send the syslog files across and that I log into to manage the box. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated. This is the first production Sensor I have setup. All my testing sensors apparently didn't have enough traffic being pushed at them. On 10/26/05, Richard Bejtlich <taosecurity@gmail.com> wrote:
Joseph Nicholson wrote:I see that snort dropped 179457 packets because it couldn't process them. Snort received 186246 packets Analyzed: 6789(3.645%) Dropped: 179457(96.355%) My gut instinct is telling me that it dropped 179457 packets because it felt there was no threat from them and that the 6789 it analyzed looked suspicious.Hi Joseph, You have a serious problem with your Snort deployment. The packets Snort dropped were never inspected, period. Can you describe your configuration? Are you sending Snort alerts directly to a database, without Barnyard? Are you running any odd rules? Sincerely, Richard http://www.taosecurity.com
-- Joseph Nicholson
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Snort-users] Quick questions about recieved packets, Richard Bejtlich |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Snort-users] Quick questions about recieved packets, Murali Raju |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Snort-users] Quick questions about recieved packets, Richard Bejtlich |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Snort-users] Quick questions about recieved packets, Murali Raju |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |