[Snort-sigs] Sourcefire VRT Certified Snort Rules Update 2010-06-05

infosec posts infosec.posts at ...2420...
Mon Jun 7 11:26:25 EDT 2010


In lieu of adjusting the published changelog format, a quick listing
of the new SO SIDs/GIDs in the update bulletin (as you have done in
the past) should be relatively painless to implement, and would
satisfy my needs, without requiring increased priority over the other
features you are working on.

My update tools do produce an environment-specific changelog, but
sometimes there are issues with the deployment, either on my side or
the VRT side.  For example, there was the issue in April where SO
rules that were supposed to be there were not included in the update
package.  The only reason I knew anything was missing was because the
update bulletin listed the specific SO rules that were supposed to
have been included with the update.

A comprehensive, rather than partial, listing of what is supposed to
be in a given update can help with validation and troubleshooting.  I
would think this would be benificial for others in the community, but
maybe it's just me.


On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Nigel Houghton <nhoughton at ...435...> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 9:41 AM, infosec posts <infosec.posts at ...2420...> wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Unless I'm mistaken, there is not a "complete list  of new and
>> modified rules" available at the link referenced below.
>>
>> These bulletins used to list the SIDs/GIDs for the SO rules in the
>> update package, like so:
>> http://seclists.org/snort/2010/q2/668
>>
>> More recent bulletins seem to have quit listing the SO rules in the
>> update, and I haven't been able to find a changelog on the website
>> that indicates what new SO rules should be in our update packages.
>> For example, since this update only includes SO rules, the changelogs
>> linked on the site are blank/empty
>> (http://www.snort.org/vrt/docs/ruleset_changelogs/2_8_6_0/changes-2010-06-05.html).
>>  This makes it difficult to determine what the new rules are and
>> verify that they have been deployed correctly.
>>
>> If this information is available somewhere, I'd be happy if someone
>> could point me to it; otherwise, could Sourcefire resume listing SO
>> rule SIDs/GIDs in these signature update bulletins, or in the
>> changelogs on the webiste?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Research <research at ...435...> wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>>
>>> Sourcefire VRT Certified Snort Rules Update
>>>
>>> Synopsis:
>>> This release adds rules to the web-client category for 0-day attacks in
>>> multiple Adobe products.
>>>
>>> Details:
>>> The Sourcefire VRT has become aware of a 0-day vulnerability in
>>> multiple
>>> Adobe products.
>>>
>>> For a complete list of new and modified rules please see:
>>>
>>> http://www.snort.org/vrt/docs/ruleset_changelogs/changes-2010-06-05.html
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
>>>
>>> iD8DBQFMCsUkQcQOxItLLaMRAlE9AJ9YkbREqvv83NB93XJron/3OJ6I0wCeOF9p
>>> q/3lG08MwBOI0HxyRyuGOaY=
>>> =ipeW
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
>>> GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
>>> lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win:
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Snort-sigs mailing list
>>> Snort-sigs at lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-sigs
>>>
>>
>
>
> We have not ever listed the shared object rules in the changelog. We
> are in the process of changing that, it has not been high on the
> priority list since most people use a tool like Pulled Pork to manage
> their rules (it produces a changelog that has the shared object rules
> listed).
>
> Tools like Pulled Pork and Oinkmaster also have the advantage of
> producing a changelog that is specific to your environment and not
> just a difference between the current and last set of rules produced.
>
> The changelogs on snort.org are there for a quick verification of what
> is new and yes, they should include the shared object rules. We are
> aware of the problem and like I said, it is on the todo list to fix
> and we will do so.
>
> --
> Nigel Houghton
> Head Mentalist
> SF VRT
> http://vrt-sourcefire.blogspot.com && http://labs.snort.org/
>




More information about the Snort-sigs mailing list