Re: Snort 2.9.8.0 can't detect hits over fragmented packets using multiple policies

[Jon Larson <jon () catbird com>]

I was able to get it working by moving the following lines:

AddFuncToConfigCheckList(sc, verifySessionConfig);
#ifdef ENABLE_HA
     AddFuncToPostConfigList(sc, SessionHAPostConfigInit, NULL);
#endif
enablePreprocAllPorts( sc, PP_SESSION, PROTO_BIT__ALL );
AddFuncToPreprocList(sc, sessionPacketProcessor, PP_SESSION_PRIORITY, PP_SESSION, PROTO_BIT__ALL);


to be outside the block:

     if (session_configuration == NULL)
     {
         ....
     }



On 1/29/16 5:32 AM, Ed Borgoyn (eborgoyn) wrote:
> Jon,
>    Thanks for the note.  We will investigate.
>      Ed Borgoyn
>      Cisco Snort Development Team
>
>
>
> On 1/25/16, 7:34 PM, "Jon Larson" <jon () catbird com> wrote:
>
> > Using netcat and fragroute I created a TCP stream that contains some
> > content that triggers a rule hit.  The content spans multiple TCP
> > packets.  If I run this with a simple configuration with one policy,
> > snort properly detects the rule hit.  However, when I run it with the
> > following:
> >
> > config binding: policy1.conf vlan 100
> > config binding: policy1.conf policy_id 1
> > config binding: policy2.conf vlan 101
> > config binding: policy2.conf policy_id 2
> >
> > I get no rule hit (the traffic is on vlan 100).  The above has three
> > policies:  the default one and the above two.  The policy1.conf file has
> > the rule that should have been hit.  I have lines in the default policy,
> > policy1.conf and policy2.conf that load stream5_tcp like this:
> >
> > preprocessor stream5_tcp: policy windows, detect_anomalies, require_3whs
> > 180, ...
> >
> > I don't know how it could work given the code in the
> > spp_session.c:initializeSessionPreproc, that only does this once:
> >
> >          AddFuncToPreprocList(sc, sessionPacketProcessor,
> > PP_SESSION_PRIORITY, PP_SESSION, PROTO_BIT__ALL);
> >
> > because up above is the check:
> >      if (session_configuration == NULL).
> >
> > As such stream5 will only be enabled for the default configuration.
> >
> > Is this a known issue with 2.9.8.0 or perhaps I'm missing something?  I
> > tested this using snort 2.9.6.2 and it works fine.
> >
> > TIA,
> > Jon L.
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----
> > Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
> > APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
> > Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
> > Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
> > _______________________________________________
> > Snort-devel mailing list
> > Snort-devel () lists sourceforge net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-devel
> > Archive:
> > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=snort-devel
> >
> > Please visit http://blog.snort.org for the latest news about Snort!


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Snort-devel mailing list
Snort-devel () lists sourceforge net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-devel
Archive:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=snort-devel

Please visit http://blog.snort.org for the latest news about Snort!