Re: [Emerging-Sigs] what s the real difference here?

[Joel Esler <jesler () sourcefire com>]

On Jul 13, 2010, at 7:54 PM, evilghost () packetmail net wrote:
> Joel Esler wrote:
> > On Jul 13, 2010, at 6:58 PM, waldo kitty wrote:
> > > On 7/13/2010 18:40, Joel Esler wrote:
> > > > CC'ing Snort-Sigs list:
> > > >
> > > > Copy and paste out of the manual for http_uri:
> > > >
> > > > "Using a content rule option followed by a http uri modifier is the same as using a uricontent by itself."
> > > that's what i thought... so... if i may be so bold... why the change in format? 
> > > which is better? is one preferred over the other? which one?
> >
> > Not sure of the reasoning behind it.  Maybe a Devel or VRT can chime in on that one.
>
> Riddle me this.  If I constrain a content match to the URI buffer (ala http_uri;) can I now use content modifiers 
> which do not work with a uricontent match?  Some of these being
> depth, distance, isdataat, etc?

I'd like the Snort team to comment on this one, as I don't want to give you a wrong answer, but since it's reading a 
normalized field, my knee jerk reaction is to say "no."



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
Snort-sigs mailing list
Snort-sigs () lists sourceforge net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-sigs