Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: Automated IDS response
From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw () wittsend com>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2000 13:38:15 -0500
On Fri, Feb 11, 2000 at 10:12:40AM -0500, Kopf , Patrick E. wrote:
Network Ice's BlackIce Defender IDS does this type of traffic blocking (based on type of attack). Defender only blocks traffic for attacks that are 'non-spoofable'. I don't know if they're the only IDS that does this or not.
Portsentry <www.psionic.com> does this for Unix/Linux systems
as well. You can select what classes of services it will react to. I
don't advice UDP or "stealth TCP" because it's spoofable, but connected
TCP port scans works great.
Doesn't have content reaction capability though. Shutting down
a route based on CGI script activity would be a bit much.
Sorry... Not a Windows product. Works great on a Linux firewall
protecting the Windows boxen behind the firewall if you are on a cable
modem or an xDSL connection. :-)
Pat Kopf
-----Original Message----- From: Michael B. Rash [mailto:mbr () math umd edu] Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2000 6:09 PM To: firewall-wizards () nfr net Subject: Automated IDS response Having your IDS respond automatically to an IP that is generating questionable traffic by dynamically managing your router ACLs (or other similar action; tcpwrappers, ipchains, etc...) to deny all traffic from the IP can be a risky thing to do from a DoS perspective; nmap's decoy option comes to mind. It would seem that any IDS should only block traffic from an IP based on an attack signature that requires bi-directional communication, like a CGI exploit over http/80 or something. Are there guidelines for deploying IDS response that discusses methods for minimizing false positives? Are there any *good* ways of doing this? --Mike http://www.math.umd.edu/~mbr
-- Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw () WittsEnd com (The Mad Wizard) | (770) 331-2437 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
Current thread:
- Automated IDS response Michael B. Rash (Feb 11)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Automated IDS response Kopf , Patrick E. (Feb 12)
- Re: Automated IDS response Michael H. Warfield (Feb 14)
- Re: Automated IDS response Michael B. Rash (Feb 14)
- Re: Automated IDS response Andy (Feb 14)
- Re: Automated IDS response Lance Spitzner (Feb 15)
- Re: Automated IDS response Michael H. Warfield (Feb 14)
- RE: Automated IDS response Robert Graham (Feb 14)
- RE: Automated IDS response Crumrine, Gary L (Feb 15)
- RE: Automated IDS response Marcus J. Ranum (Feb 15)
- Re: Automated IDS response Paul Cardon (Feb 17)
- RE: Automated IDS response Robert Graham (Feb 15)
- RE: Automated IDS response Russ Wolfe (Feb 16)
- RE: Automated IDS response ark (Feb 17)
