Re: Best practices for very high volume install..

["Crook, Parker" <Parker_Crook () reyrey com>]

Just wanted to throw in my $0.02... If you're issue is the Snort process consuming your CPU and dropping rules, I've 
gotten some pretty performance gains from using different configuration files based on vlans and subnets and taskset it 
to specific processors.  Of course I did this so I can enable different rulesets for the specific environments instead 
of systemically applying all rules that fit within the organization.  By surgically setting my rulesets to be 
appropriate for each well-defined subnet, I got not only better packet stats, but a better tuned system.

-Parker

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jefferson, Shawn [mailto:Shawn.Jefferson () bcferries com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 2:20 PM
> To: Weir, Jason; snort-users () lists sourceforge net
> Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Best practices for very high volume install..
>
> All I can tell you is my past experience, and that has been that the ET
> rulesets kill my performance.  I know that there was some performance work
> being done on the ET rulesets though, and maybe what you are saying is now the
> case.
>
> What I have done is run the rulesets that I *can* run without dropping
> packets, in what I feel is the most appropriate place to run them. It comes
> down to what you are protecting and the level of protection/detection you can
> afford (IMO).
>
> I'm building new sensors based on 2.9 and I will try the ET rulesets out on my
> WAN sensor again, to see if I can run them without dropping packets.  If I
> can, then I will, and I do suggest you run the ET ruleset if you can do so,
> for sure.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Weir, Jason [mailto:jason.weir () nhrs org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:11 AM
> To: snort-users () lists sourceforge net
> Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Best practices for very high volume install..
>
> I run both ET & VRT rulesets (not heavily pruned) and it's a toss up on
> performance between the two..
>
> The top 50 worst performing rules are right about 50/50...
>
> Any rules doing lots of PCRE will kill your performance and those rules
> need to be looked at no matter where you get your rules.
>
> To suggest not running one of the most cutting edge rules sets out there
> because your hardware can't handle it doesn't sound right to me...
>
> That's like not locking your car because you don't like carrying your
> keys around....
>
> -J
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jefferson, Shawn [mailto:Shawn.Jefferson () bcferries com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:54 PM
> > To: Joel Esler; Castle, Shane
> > Cc: <snort-users () lists sourceforge net>
> > Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Best practices for very high
> > volume install..
> >
> >
> > That's what I have found as well... snort+barnyard2, and tune
> > the ruleset.  Don't use the ET rules (or if you do,
> > tune/prune them aggressively).  On my network, I use network
> > taps with two sensors, and run the ET ruleset on the tap that
> > connects my network to the Internet only (bandwidth is
> > considerably lower than on my corporate WAN links-on which I
> > use only the Snort VRT ruleset).
> >
> > I'm not pushing as much data through as you are... I've seen
> > spikes up around 400 Mb/s with no drops though, and this is
> > somewhat older hardware.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joel Esler [mailto:jesler () sourcefire com]
> > Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 5:02 PM
> > To: Castle, Shane
> > Cc: <snort-users () lists sourceforge net>
> > Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Best practices for very high
> > volume install..
> >
> > Using unified2 and barnyard2 removes the output logging
> > slowdown from Snort. It can go very very fast.
> >
> > Most of the speed can be found in reducing ruleset and tuning.
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Dec 20, 2010, at 6:27 PM, "Castle, Shane"
> > <scastle () bouldercounty org> wrote:
> >
> > > Using Barnyard? The claim is that with Barnyard2 a 10G link can be
> > > supported.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Shane Castle
> > > Data Security Mgr, Boulder County IT
> > > CISSP GSEC GCIH
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wil Schultz [mailto:wschultz () bsdboy com]
> > > Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 14:25
> > > To: snort-users () lists sourceforge net
> > > Subject: [Snort-users] Best practices for very high volume install..
> > >
> > > Hey there, have a very high traffic install (snort
> > 2.9/barnyard2) that
> > > I'm trying to get into a good and usable position.
> > >
> > > At this point I've got a gig port that's saturated to the
> > box so we're
> > > going to do a 2g port-channel here in a bit.
> > >
> > > So far I've come to the conclusion that mysql binary logging isn't
> > > realistic, so it's been turned off.
> > >
> > > Additionally I've got a script that runs at midnight to purge alerts
> > > that are greater than 2 days old.
> > >
> > > I'm considering putting the database into RAM for a little
> > more speed.
> > > Does anyone else have some other best practice type
> > suggestions for a
> > > very high traffic box?
> > >
> > > -wil

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forrester recently released a report on the Return on Investment (ROI) of
Google Apps. They found a 300% ROI, 38%-56% cost savings, and break-even
within 7 months.  Over 3 million businesses have gone Google with Google Apps:
an online email calendar, and document program that's accessible from your 
browser. Read the Forrester report: http://p.sf.net/sfu/googleapps-sfnew
_______________________________________________
Snort-users mailing list
Snort-users () lists sourceforge net
Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users
Snort-users list archive:
http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=snort-users