Re: [Full-disclosure] Attack pattern selection criteria for IPS products

Yes they do all look at the same common holes and flag them but as for
detection everyone has a different method.

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Rohit Patnaik <quanticle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Why would Cisco, Juniper, etc. maintain the signature sets?
Presumably, each company maintains its own set of allow/deny rules.

--Rohit Patnaik

2009/10/9 srujan <srujan82@xxxxxxxxx>:
I agree with your word let "customer network admin selects it". But
Tipping Point, Juniper, Cisco and Snort will have a wide range of customers,
and maintaining different signature set for different Orgs is a big
headache.

All these guys are maintaining 95% to 99% detection coverage at NSS
testing. That's why i asked about the selection criteria.

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:36 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:47:24 +0530, srujan said:

What is the vulnerability selection criteria of Tipping Point, Juniper
IPS
products.

Is it covering each and every CVE ID or is it selecting particular
kind of
attacks. If so what is selection criteria (cvss score or severity
level or
most publicly exploited)

If the answer isn't "customer network admin selects it", the products
are
broken and brain damaged. Different sites have different security
stances,
and different opinions regarding the trade-off between the added
security
benefit and the throughput and latency hits you take.

Even within a site, the trade-offs may vary. I have some machines that
are actually air-gapped, some that are heavily firewalled, and some that
are lightly firewalled - and there's probably some Snort sensors and
honeypots
too.. ;)

If you're asking for "what pre-canned detection rules they come with",
it's
probably "all the known vulns that we can figure out how to write a
Snort
rule that doesn't suck resources". :)

OK, maybe they don't use Snort - but the same problems of filter
expressiveness, whether/how to do a regexp, and so on, are faced by all
IDS/IPS
systems. If you need to do a regexp backref, it's going to either not
be part
of the available toolset, or it's going to suck at line rate on high
speed
interfaces. Matching '\((134|934){3,5})\(foo|bar)(more ugly)(\1|\2)' is
going
to suck whether it's Snort or silicon.



_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/




--
http://www.goldwatches.com
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Relevant Pages