RE: Views and Correlation in Intrusion Detection

[Chmielarski TOM-ATC090 <Tom.Chmielarski () motorola com>]

<mild rant>
While were discussing flaws in VA scanners - it would also be nice if they did a better job reporting what they checked 
for and found NOT vulnerable, or at least what was checked for and did not seem vulnerable.   So I could look up and 
say "Vuln for MS-xxxx - not susceptible to exploit via scan on 6/1/2003" rather then saying "well, it doesn't say am 
vulnerable, and I ran a check last week so it probably included this check and passed..". 

</rant>

And while im dreaming id like a private island. :)
-Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Gula [mailto:rgula () tenablesecurity com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:41 AM
To: Chmielarski TOM-ATC090; Focus-Ids (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Views and Correlation in Intrusion Detection



> How about a "user's" POV?
>
> To be really effective, I'd like to see a system that looks at packets
> coming in to the network, compares those to packets hitting specific
> servers, "knows" if the server is vulnerable to the specific attack and
> *then* sends an alert.
>
> To do this kind of work you would need:
> 1) a db (A) with the info on each server - OS, applications,
> vulnerabilities, etc.
> 2) a detection engine that matches the IP and attack sig to the entry in
> the db (A) with its own db (B) of sigs
> 3) an escalation procedure that recognizes that attack A was successful and
> attack B has begun and therefore alerts "more aggressively".
>
> I don't want to know if an attacker is trying an overflow attack on my IMAP
> server if my IMAP server isn't vulnerable to that attack.  I could care
> less.  I also don't want to know if some box somewhere with Code Red is
> hitting my network *unless* I have a box that's susceptible to Code Red.


This is exactly what the Lightning Console does. In addition, the console
also 'knows' who owns the targeted systems and can send an alert to the
effected end users when an IDS event targets a vulnerable server.

The big issue I have with VA/IDS correlation is the accuracy of the
underlying VA database. If you are just scanning once a quarter or even
once a month, this VA database can get out of date fast. Our approach
is to use distributed scanning (multiple, tiered Nessus scanners) so you
can scan a class B in hours. We also are BETA testing a passive vulnerability
scanner which determines vulnerabilities and topology changes from watching
network sessions.

Ron Gula, CTO
Tenable Network Security
http://www.tenablesecurity.com


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------