OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: n3m3s1shushmail.com
Date: Wed Jan 16 2002 - 06:21:24 CST

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

    Hey everybody,
            I'm assisting a client with a IDS bakeoff and I'm getting less than favorable results with Snort. Not that all the other vendors are screaming meemees either, but I gotta be doing something wrong with snort. I posted to the snort list and got some suggestions, but when I tried those suggestions and responded with the results, I got nothing. So, I figured I'd try this list. Rather than re-hash all the e-mail from the snort list, I'll just give the basics:

    Running Snort 1.8.3 on a Dual Pentium III 1.0GHz, w/ 512 M RAM and a Syskonnect Gig card.
    Red Hat Linux 7.2.

    Traffic is real-world. Tons of Web, DNS, scans, you name it. The other IDSs are alerting like mad. Started at like 120Mbit/s spiking to 150Mbit/s, but some of the later tests were looking at roughly half that bandwidth.
    Here is a mixture of suggested and my own commandlines I was running and the results. This is pretty much verbatim to the post I made to the snort list. I also posted my snort.conf - if anyone here would like to see it, I've put it at the bottom.

    >>Try using a snort commandline like
    >>sbin/snort -A fast -b -l ./log -d -i eth1 and see what happens.

    >This logged everything it saw to a time-stamped file. No alerts, but it logged >every packet (0% packet loss). Encouraging.

    >>try snort -dev -i eth2 to see full dumps of the traffic on your eth2
    >>interface to make sure it can see everything

    >Oh baby. Tons of stuff ;-)
    >
    >Other things I tried:
    >
    >1. snort -A fast -l ./log -d -i eth2 (for 1 minute)
    > -MUCH logging, but dropped ~96.5% of traffic.
    > "Snort analyzed 38950 out of 1117120 packets, dropping 1078170 (96.513%) >packets."
    > -also, while I had almost 8,000 IP directories in ./logs, the alerts file is 0 >length. Am I not
    >doing pattern matching here? It didn't seem to read my snort.conf...
    >
    >2. snort -A fast -l ./log -d -i eth2 -c ./snort.conf (for 1 minute)
    > -generated ~1600 alerts of which 99% were ICMP Dest. Unreachables. The other >1% were Bad Traffic (loopback source address). There is much web, dns, scans >and other stuff in this traffic.
    > "Snort analyzed 762866 out of 1110037 packets, dropping 347171 (31.276%) >packets."
    > -This was with the default ruleset (884 rules).
    >
    >3. Repeated same test as #2, but with only web rules loaded [499 rules] (1 >minute).
    > -0 alerts
    > "Snort analyzed 733682 out of 1119517 packets, dropping 385835 (34.464%)."
    >4. Ran same test as #3, except I changed the http_decode preprocessor to: 80 >-cginull (removed -unicode) in the hopes that it would catch something unicode. > I also tried using the unicode preprocessor and my notes here are a little >fuzzy. I'm showing on one of the tests that I had 103 alerts, but I don't know >which preprocessor. Sorry. Anyway, the 103 alerts were all Unicode Directory
    >Traversal alerts, but didn't show the actual attack. I went in and looked at >the logged packets and there were definitely WEB-IIS cmd.exe and other things >in there, but didn't get alerted.
    >
    >For pretty much all the the tests, it appeared that either the 1) signatures >aren't being compared against (i.e. only preprocessor type alerts) or 2) I can >only have 1 alerts per packet (some IDSs are like this, is snort?). My guess >is that it's the former instead of the latter. Right now, Snort is not keeping >up with the other 3 IDSs being tested, so I'm relying on you guys to keep me >from shooting myself in the foot!! I know I'm just doing something wrong, I've >seen plenty of posts in the archives where people are using Snort at much >higher bandwidth than what I'm looking at.

    Can anyone offer any assistance or (at the least) support the results I'm seeing? The client is kind of looking at me since I suggested bringing Snort into the mix (they were initially only looking at commercial products). I'm trying not to look back.

    Tahnks,

    Norm

    $ cat snort.conf |grep -vE "^$|^#"

    var HOME_NET 10.0.0.0/8
    var EXTERNAL_NET any
    var SMTP $HOME_NET
    var HTTP_SERVERS $HOME_NET
    var SQL_SERVERS $HOME_NET

    var DNS_SERVERS $HOME_NET
    preprocessor frag2
    preprocessor stream4: detect_scans
    preprocessor stream4_reassemble
    preprocessor http_decode: 80 -unicode -cginull
    preprocessor rpc_decode: 111
    preprocessor bo: -nobrute
    preprocessor telnet_decode
    preprocessor portscan: $HOME_NET 4 3 portscan.log
    include classification.config
    include web-cgi.rules
    include web-coldfusion.rules
    include web-frontpage.rules
    include web-iis.rules
    include web-misc.rules
    include web-attacks.rules

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: Hush 2.1
    Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com

    wlwEARECABwFAjxFbi8VHG4zbTNzMXNAaHVzaG1haWwuY29tAAoJEFhAkA76am0fKxUA
    nRdaBHyXAwvL/VBAhoDd/Ta1Bvp5AKCAAgpyUt/rIN69ePtuxPy7BNiVAA==
    =K1eO
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----