Re: ROI on IDS/IPS products

[Stefano Zanero <s.zanero () securenetwork it>]

Jeremy Bennett wrote:

> So, why do you consider it so far fetched that I might configure an IPS
> not on a signature-by-signature basis but an application, resource, and
> risk basis? 

Application and resource I can understand. Risk basis defies me.

Activating or deactivating signatures "by application and resource" is
something easy to do, I'd say it's a matter of putting some buttons on
the UI.

On the other hand the risk decisions, and their elements, are far too
complex to handle algorithmically.

> 1. A vendor you can trust to reliably deliver signatures and rate them
> by risk and chance of false positive.

You cannot rate risk for a signature. I'd also contend that you cannot
really define the chances of false positives (if it has known false
positives it shouldn't be there, actually... and if it is a "generic
signature" then it shouldn't probably be there, either).

> 2. A product UI that would allow signatures to be applied on a resource
> and application basis. For example, block everything suspicious to my
> web far except for web traffic. 

Something like "allow only ports 80 and 443 to my web server" ? Don't
they usually teach that in network security 101 ? :)

> For web traffic block anything with a
> very low rate of false positive and alert on anything with a medium and
> log for anything with a high chance of FP.

Excellent, except that the concept of something with a high rate of FPs
and the concept of an IPS are at odds with each other.

> There are many customers that will never have that expertise. 

Then those customers need a good MSSP, and not to worry about technical
details.

-- 
Cordiali saluti,

Ing. Stefano Zanero, PhD
CTO & Co-Founder

Secure Network S.r.l.
Via Venezia, 23 - 20099 Sesto San Giovanni (MI)
Phone: +39 02.24126788
Fax: +39 02.24126789
email: s.zanero () securenetwork it
web: www.securenetwork.it