Snort mailing list archives

Re: Reliability of signatures


From: Jason Wallace <jason.r.wallace () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 11:38:04 -0500

Maybe I'm missing something here that everyone else sees, but I don't
see how this could produce any form of reliable data.

1) Isn't accuracy of rules in part reliant on how well the sensor is tuned?

2) Isn't the determination of a legit hit vs. FP partially dependent
on the analysis skill?

3) GID:SID wouldn't be enough. You have to use GID:SID:REV since rev
bumps are often done to fix FP issues.

4) Wouldn't an open submission process/tool be vulnerable to malicious
bad data submissions?

Thx,
Wally

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Joel Esler <jesler () sourcefire com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Martin Holste <mcholste () gmail com> wrote:

I like that idea too.  It'd make a lot of sense to integrate it into
snort.org - in fact there's probably a lot of data about Snort
detection performance, config options and rule quality we could put up
there.  Communication favors the defender...


Thanks, Marty.  I'm all for free resources, but that would make this
project vendor-sponsored, which makes my spider senses tingle...  I'd
feel better if a non-profit hosted, or at least a company that doesn't
sell signatures.  Otherwise, it'd be like Starbucks sponsoring a
coffee rating site.  Up-vote for Trenta!

Vendor sponsored projects are okay I think, especially since we have the
resources to donate to a project that is going to make everyone's detection
better.


 I would think it would need to have some kind of automatic reporting
method,
perhaps with manual commenting?
J

What do you mean by automatic?  I'd think we'd want this to remain
manual, but as integrated into the analysis process as possible via
whatever GUI you're using.  For SF products, a button built into the
GUI, and maybe something to click on in Snorby, et al.?  And, of
course, there would need to be the manual vote page on the site.  A
basic JSON API to receive submissions would do fine on the web side.

Actually, I could probably code this up this weekend if someone
volunteers a neutral hosting space.  Will Jeff Atwood sue if we use
snortoverflow.com?


What I was thinking was having a reputation (hit) count score from gid:sid
and maybe from the IP involved, then allow people to comment on said results
manually.
Using that information could build a high or low reputation score based upon
actual results, allowing the ruleset to be better tuned and formed, allowing
reduction of false positives or false negatives.
Just thinking outloud (which is usually a bad habit)
Joel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources
and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's
connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these
rules translate into the virtual world?
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb
_______________________________________________
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


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources
and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's
connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these
rules translate into the virtual world? 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb
_______________________________________________
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


Current thread: