IDS mailing list archives

RE: Cisco CTR


From: "Rob Shein" <shoten () starpower net>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:07:58 -0500

Just because it can be envisioned doesn't mean that the application is
worthless.  There are things that can be envisioned that have the same
relevance to firewalls, IDS, antivirus, IPS, and honeypots/nets.  But just
because something isn't a magic bullet doesn't mean it has no value or
purpose.  Each individual case requires thought about tradeoffs.  In this
case, the risk of someone managing to auto-patch an exploit in band with the
exploit itself may well be outweighed by the minimizing of alerts on futile
attacks; it comes down to the policies and priorities of the end user.


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Marziani [mailto:marziani () oasis com] 
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 11:29 AM
To: Rob Shein; 'Gary Flynn'
Cc: 'Liran Chen'; focus-ids () securityfocus com
Subject: RE: Cisco CTR


-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Shein [mailto:shoten () starpower net]

There's nothing unsubstantiated about it at all.  Look at 
the code for 
some of the exploits, actually READ the code.

Do you honestly think that all the intrusion apps hackers 
write and use are easily available?  Malicious hackers almost 
never share their trade secrets.

in most situations.  The true definition of "immediately," meaning
"without
delay," does not apply here. There is a delay, and while it can be 
very short, it is far longer than that of CTR's response, 
which truly 
is immediate.

So you can't envision any circumstance in which the Cisco CTR 
could be bogged down just long enough to allow a patch to 
occur, or even easier, for the hacking program to take over 
the port it just came in through and fake the response that 
the patched program would give (i.e. exploit an apache flaw, 
get root, shut down apache and run tiny custom daemon app in 
it's place which advertises a version of apache without the 
flaw).  I just pulled this off the top of my head, do you 
think hackers can't come up with something even better?

I'm not slamming any product or offering like the Cisco CTR.  
These are very good products and protect in ways that few if 
any previous systems can.  I'm just saying that no system is 
bulletproof and we should never underestimate the opposition.

-Michael




-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Marziani [mailto:marziani () oasis com]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 10:47 AM
To: Rob Shein; 'Gary Flynn'
Cc: 'Liran Chen'; focus-ids () securityfocus com
Subject: RE: Cisco CTR


-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Shein [mailto:shoten () starpower net]

Yes, but nobody patches it THAT quickly.  CTR acts
immediately, not a
half-hour later...it would have started scanning by the 
time the 
hacker at the other end notices that he has a shell...

Please don't make unsubstantiated blanket statements like that.  
Hackers are skilled sysadmins and programmers who create packaged 
hacking tools that not only search for and exploit flaws 
to get them 
onto a system, but also install programs, disable 
security features, 
and yes, patch servers
*immediately* once they get inside.

A system like Cisco CTR might very well detect the attack 
before the 
hacker's program has time to patch, but that all depends 
on how good 
the hacker's program is, the state of the network, etc.  
I'd like to 
see the results of a live test of such an event.

If this type of attack can succeed as I think it could, I think a 
solution would be for the IDS to keep a record of the 
patch levels 
of every system in the network and allow those patch levels to be 
updated only through an administrative interface (requiring 
additional authentication and of course increasing the 
administrative workload).  Then the system wouldn't be fooled by 
this technique.

-Michael

Michael Marziani
IT Consultant
Entercede Consulting, Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Flynn [mailto:flynngn () jmu edu]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 5:58 PM
To: Rob Shein
Cc: 'Liran Chen'; focus-ids () securityfocus com
Subject: Re: Cisco CTR




Rob Shein wrote:

I think this largely relates to the earlier discussion
about how there
is a difference between a "false positive" and an actual
attack that
fails to succeed.  Ask yourself this: are you going 
to want to 
know about all attacks or just those that have a chance of 
success?  If someone throws IIS attacks at your apache
web server,
do
you want to
know about it...or do you want to wait until they 
start using 
apache-compatible exploits?

There's a good summary of what CTR does here: 
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps5054/

Another thing to think about - some folks have a habit of
patching
the hole they came in through. Just because a 
vulnerability scan 
shows no vulnerability it does not mean an attack was
unsuccessful.

--
Gary Flynn
Security Engineer - Technical Services
James Madison University

Please R.U.N.S.A.F.E. http://www.jmu.edu/computing/runsafe






------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Network with over 10,000 of the brightest minds in information
security at the largest, most highly-anticipated industry
event of the
year. Don't miss RSA Conference 2004! Choose from over 200 class
sessions and see demos from more than 250 industry 
vendors. If your
job touches security, you need to be here. Learn more or
register at
http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/RSA_focus-ids_031023
and use priority code SF4.

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













---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Network with over 10,000 of the brightest minds in information security
at the largest, most highly-anticipated industry event of the year.
Don't miss RSA Conference 2004! Choose from over 200 class sessions and
see demos from more than 250 industry vendors. If your job touches
security, you need to be here. Learn more or register at
http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/RSA_focus-ids_031023
and use priority code SF4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Current thread: