IDS mailing list archives
RE: Preventing layer 3/4 evasions
From: "Srinivasa R. Addepalli" <Srao () Intoto com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 13:09:40 -0800
Typical inline IDS/IPS devices follow the approach of normalization of IP fragments, TCP out-of-sequence packets and others. Since it is in line of traffic, this is possible to do and I guess most of IDS/IPS devices do this. If IDS/IPS devices are doing analysis on sniffed traffic, then profiling of target and normalizing the traffic based on the target are very important to do further analysis on the traffic. Srini -----Original Message----- From: listbounce () securityfocus com [mailto:listbounce () securityfocus com] On Behalf Of Steve Reinhardt Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 5:15 PM To: focus-ids () securityfocus com Subject: Preventing layer 3/4 evasions I'm curious about the market status quo and trends in the area of how network IDS/IPS products are dealing with layer 3/4 evasion techniques (a la Ptacek & Newsham: ambiguous segmentation & fragmentation, ttl tricks, etc.). The Handley/Paxson/Kreibich paper from Usenix01 lists three approaches (not counting "use a host-based IDS" :-) ): 1. inline normalization 2. profiling the intranet and using target-specific algorithms 3. bifurcating analysis From what I've read, Snort is going route #2, with the Sourcefire RNA system doing the profiling. - Is there any public information regarding which approach (if any) other commercial systems are using? - Does Snort's decision indicate any sort of consensus that #2 is the best approach, or would that be considered controversial? (Clearly #3 isn't practical as a general technique, but the Handley paper seems to make a good case for #1.) - Do you all feel that existing approaches (like Snort's, or perhaps some commercial implementation of #1) are adequate, or is there a need for a more robust solution? Basically we've had some ideas in this space and are trying to figure out whether they're worth pursuing... guess I should add "If so, how much would you pay for it?" to the last question :-). Thanks! Steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Test Your IDS Is your IDS deployed correctly? Find out quickly and easily by testing it with real-world attacks from CORE IMPACT. Go to http://www.coresecurity.com/index.php5?module=Form&action=impact&campaig n=intro_sfw to learn more. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************************************ ******** This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Intoto Inc. ******************************************************************************** This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Intoto Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Test Your IDS Is your IDS deployed correctly? Find out quickly and easily by testing it with real-world attacks from CORE IMPACT. Go to http://www.coresecurity.com/index.php5?module=Form&action=impact&campaign=intro_sfw to learn more. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Preventing layer 3/4 evasions Steve Reinhardt (Dec 20)
- Re: Preventing layer 3/4 evasions Vern Paxson (Dec 26)
- RE: Preventing layer 3/4 evasions Srinivasa R. Addepalli (Dec 26)
