IDS mailing list archives
IDS is dead, etc
From: Martin Roesch <roesch () sourcefire com>
Date: 19 Jun 2003 11:57:13 -0400
Just to throw my hat into the ring on this topic in this particular forum, I thought I'd comment. (like I don't get enough email as it is...) Boiling the Gartner report down, here are my take aways: 1) IDSes produce too many false positives (i.e. the quality of the information they produce is low) 2) IDSes produce too much data (i.e. the quantity of information they produce is high) 3) There is no solution to these problems, therefore IDS is dead and we should all buy in-line IPS, er, "deep content inspection firewalls"! So, is there any way to make the quality of data coming out of the IDS higher while at the same time diminishing the amount of information generated? We've been talking about this exact topic on this list since 1999 on and off and I think all the IDS vendors have ideas how to achieve this goal by integrating network maps and host/service identification into the IDS's world view. If those ideas should actually make their way to market, would that make the systems more useful? I believe so. (At this point I usually pitch Sourcefire, but I'll spare you all.) IDS is all about giving people awareness of what's happening on their networks independent of the network management picture or the other security infrastructure. Deploying security infrastructure without having a mechanism to monitor that infrastructure's behavior and efficacy is like rolling out a spacecraft with all of the telemetry systems removed, it may be doing its job but when something goes wrong (and it will) you will be relying on data coming out of failed/bypassed systems to try to effect repairs. The whole "ASICs will save us all" part of the argument is where I really start scratching my head. How do ASICs, which tend to exchange flexibility for performance, suddenly become these hyperintelligent application layer analysis devices with enough flexibility to evolve with the relatively rapid changes in the application protocols? NPUs I can see, but ASICs really don't seem like an appropriate solution here. I believe wishful thinking might be driving this line of argument... Finally, we have the "if you can detect the attacks, why don't you just prevent them?!?!?" argument. What happens if I can't be 100% certain about the attack? Blocking attacks is an all-or-nothing proposition, if you're wrong you're 100% wrong and you just DoSed yourself, what are the chances that large enterprise networks are going to trust their critical infrastructure to that kind of system? Anyway, I hope that wasn't too much of a rehash of other people's thoughts and you guys found it somewhat insightful. Obviously I think Gartner is being inflammatory and creating their own hype cycle, but I've got a vested interest in this technological field. I believe that noisy, inaccurate IDS is definitely dying due to a number of factors, but it's the vendors/developers themselves that are killing it. -Marty -- Martin Roesch - Founder/CTO, Sourcefire Inc. - (410)290-1616 Sourcefire: Snort-based Enterprise Intrusion Detection Infrastructure roesch () sourcefire com - http://www.sourcefire.com Snort: Open Source Network IDS - http://www.snort.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attend the Black Hat Briefings & Training, July 28 - 31 in Las Vegas, the world's premier technical IT security event! 10 tracks, 15 training sessions, 1,800 delegates from 30 nations including all of the top experts, from CSO's to "underground" security specialists. See for yourself what the buzz is about! Early-bird registration ends July 3. This event will sell out. www.blackhat.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- IDS is dead, etc Martin Roesch (Jun 19)
- RE: IDS is dead, etc Roger A. Grimes (Jun 22)
- Re: IDS is dead, etc Lance Spitzner (Jun 22)
- Re: IDS is dead, etc Martin Roesch (Jun 22)
- Re: IDS is dead, etc Dragos Ruiu (Jun 23)
- Re: IDS is dead, etc Martin Roesch (Jun 22)
- Re: IDS is dead, etc roy lo (Jun 22)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: IDS is dead, etc broyds (Jun 22)
- Re: IDS is dead, etc belka (Jun 22)
- Re: IDS is dead, etc Martin Roesch (Jun 22)
- RE: IDS is dead, etc Craig H. Rowland (Jun 23)
- RE: IDS is dead, etc Paul Schmehl (Jun 25)
- RE: IDS is dead, etc Craig H. Rowland (Jun 23)
(Thread continues...)