mailing list archives
Re: Snort 22.214.171.124 Now Available
From: Russ Combs <rcombs () sourcefire com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:52:52 -0500
Correction on where to send / how to file bugs and other issues ... please
see the info here:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Russ Combs <rcombs () sourcefire com> wrote:
Eoin has provided a pcap from the blog referenced earlier in the thread and
we are able to recreate the issue. This pcap differs from the pcap I
crafted with respect to ack placement which is why I was not able to
reproduce the results earlier. I've opened a bug on it and will try to get
this into the next release.
The bug is in Snort's stream5 preprocessor. Http_inspect depends on
stream5 to reassemble the TCP payloads and in this case the stream was
flushed prematurely. This issue predates Snort 2.9.0.
For the record, the Snort Team was able to reproduce and identify the
problem within minutes of receiving the problematic pcap. It had earlier
been sent only to research () sourcefire com Please copy
snort-team () sourcefire com and/or snort-devel () lists sourceforge net on such
emails in the future to help avoid a similar delay.
This is an older one I had sent in to research () sourcefire com This is the
one that is the same as the blog posting, sorry it took so long to dig up.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: http_header and split packets Date:
Fri, 17 Sep 2010 18:12:40 +0000 From: Eoin Miller
<eoin.miller () trojanedbinaries com> <eoin.miller () trojanedbinaries com> To:
research () sourcefire com
Not really sure if there is much you guys can do for this or not, but when
we see an HTTP request being split across two packets (generally due to an
extremely long URI and IE's insanely long list of "Accept:" headers),
Snort's http_inspect doesn't get all the content from the multiple packets
into the buffers which leads to some false negatives (we had about a
thousand false negatives last night due to this issue). Since the URI is
very long and IE puts the "Host: " header near the end of the request, it
becomes easy to circumvent this type of detection against IE browsers that
is based upon the HTTP host header unless you end up using jumbo frames or
something. The attached PCAP is a sample of traffic we are unable to alert
on with the below sigs for tracking known names of malvertising servers:
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Russ Combs <rcombs () sourcefire com> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:55 PM, L0rd Ch0de1m0rt <l0rdch0de1m0rt () gmail com
Hello. I guess my questions now are:
1) is HTTP reassembly an officially recognised bug by SourceFire (I
have gotten confirmation from multiple people on and off list that say
they have similar issues)?
As of now, "HTTP reassembly" is not an official bug. I took the request
from the blog link, created what appeared to be an equivalent session (as
far as the request goes) and don't have any problem with reassembly.
2) When is it going to be fixed? As previously mentioned, I consider
this non-trivial since it leads to easy IDS/IPS evasion.
That is not to say that you don't have a legitimate issue. But a pcap
would certainly help validate the problem here and expedite the fix.
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Steven Sturges
<steve.sturges () sourcefire com> wrote:
The issue I was referring to doesn't sound like Eoin's.
It was something that was an issue in 2.9.0 with the addition
of some of the stateful tracking in HTTP response tracking
(partly in relating to gzip decoding and dechunking of responses)
when dealing with stream reassembled vs original data packets.
That was what I was indicating was addressed in 126.96.36.199.
I apologize for the confusion here... Didn't realize that you
were specifically referring to the other post.
On 11/8/2010 12:11 PM, L0rd Ch0de1m0rt wrote:
Hello. Unfortunately I cannot provide pcap but I hoped to provide
enough info so that it could be reproduced.
Eoin: I saw your email and read your blog post when it came out ... I
was just hoping that snort version 188.8.131.52 fixed the issues with the
HTTP pre-processor and reassembly since Steve Sturges indicated it did
but maybe he is referring to other fixes???
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Russ Combs <rcombs () sourcefire com>
Can you send us a pcap?
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:45 AM, L0rd Ch0de1m0rt <
l0rdch0de1m0rt () gmail com>
I am still experiencing HTTP stream reassembly issues when trying to
match across multiple fragmented packets with snort 184.108.40.206.
Specifically, this happens on a HTTP POST where the headers are in a
different packet than the POST data. Consider the following rule you
can use along with scapy to reproduce if you want:
alert tcp any any -> $HOME_NET $HTTP_PORTS (msg:"Incoming German
to Batman"; flow:established,to_server; content:"POST"; http_method;
0a|Accept-Language: de"; nocase; http_header; content:!"|0d 0a 0d
0a|not4batman=true&"; content:!"\; batsecret=sesstoken4robin";
http_cookie; classtype:trojan-activity; sid:8008135; rev:17;)
It alerts (b/c all the URI and HTTP header stuffs match in the
packet) but it shouldn't alert b/c the HTTP POST data starts with
'not4batman=true&' (but the POST data is in a subsequent packet than
the one containing the headers).
Anyone else still having issues or have done more in-depth testing
with 220.127.116.11 and the HTTP pre-processor?
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Steven Sturges
<steve.sturges () sourcefire com> wrote:
There was an issue in that HTTP inspect wasn't correctly handling
raw vs. stream reassembled packets when looking at HTTP response
data. This fix is included in 2901 -- refer to ChangeLog (changes
As to the support of 2.8.6, with the release of 2.9.0, 2.8.6.x
is no longer supported. When there is a new "3 digit" release no
further patches are made to the previous version of Snort.
On 11/1/2010 1:05 PM, L0rd Ch0de1m0rt wrote:
Hello. Does this release fix the issue where the HTTP
wasn't properly examining reassembled data across fragmented
(I don't know the exact cause of the bug - maybe it was the other
around and Stream5 wasn't properly doing the reassebly.) It was
announced that there would be a patch for that issue, just want to
if this is it. If so, when can we expect the 18.104.22.168 patch be
released? 22.214.171.124 is still supported, right?
The Next 800 Companies to Lead America's Growth: New Video Whitepaper
David G. Thomson, author of the best-selling book "Blueprint to a
Billion" shares his insights and actions to help propel your
business during the next growth cycle. Listen Now!
Snort-devel mailing list
Snort-devel () lists sourceforge net
Snort 126.96.36.199 Now Available Snort Releases (Nov 01)
Re: Snort 188.8.131.52 Now Available Rich Graves (Nov 02)