[Snort-users] shellcode_ports

Gentoo-Wally gentoowally at ...11827...
Wed May 24 10:10:07 EDT 2006


var HTTP_PORTS 80
include somefile.rules
var HTTP_PORTS 8080
include somefile.rules

ouch, so a packet would have to be compared to any sig's in
somefile.rules twice?

var HTTP_PORTS 80
include somefile.rules
var HTTP_PORTS 8080

That should work right? It should then pickup the normal includes at
the bottom of the snort.conf (as long as somefile.rules exsisted at
the bottom also)?

If you did a ...

var HTTP_PORTS 80
include somefile.rules
var HTTP_PORTS 8080
include somefile.rules

....

include somefile.rules

Then would it then compare a single packet 3 times (once as 80 and
twice as 8080)?

Wally

On 5/24/06, Joel Esler <joel.esler at ...1935...> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> You must specify a different rule include after each port specification.
>  The example in the Snort.conf is correct.
>
> Joel
>
> Gentoo-Wally wrote:
> > Is there a better way to define SHELLCODE_PORTS other than !80?
> >
> > All the sig's using this var show..
> >
> > $EXTERNAL_NET $SHELLCODE_PORTS -> $HOME_NET  any
> >
> > If we really want to look for shellcode to any port from every port
> > but 80 then why not on 80 also? Or why not also exclude 8080 and 443
> > (or any other encrypted ports like 22)
> >
> > Assuming this works the same way as HTTP_PORTS...
> >
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !80
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !8080
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !443
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !22
> >
> > Or even
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !80
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !8080
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !443
> > var SHELLCODE_PORTS !22
> > var EXCLUDE !22
> > var EXCLUDE !443
> >
> > and rewriting these sigs with oinkmaster to be...
> >
> > $EXTERNAL_NET $SHELLCODE_PORTS -> $HOME_NET  $EXCLUDE
> >
> > Since looking for shellcode on encrypted traffic is kind of a waste of
> > time, right?
> >
> > What are others doing for this?
> >
> > This brings up another point...
> >
> > the snort.conf shows defining these port options for multiple ports like
> > this...
> >
> > ## var HTTP_PORTS 80
> > ## include somefile.rules
> > ## var HTTP_PORTS 8080
> > ## include somefile.rules
> >
> > is specifying an include after each port defined necessary or is the
> > following adequate?
> >
> > var HTTP_PORTS 80
> > var HTTP_PORTS 8080
> > ...
> > include somefile.rules
> >
> > using snort 2.4.4
> >
> > Thx,
> > Wally
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk!
> > Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in
> > the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
> > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=k&kid7521&bid$8729&dat1642
> > _______________________________________________
> > Snort-users mailing list
> > Snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> > Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users
> > Snort-users list archive:
> > http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=ort-users
> >
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFEdIKZKbCSyXHckt4RArkXAKCRcrK5gwT39TSyBQTIDhQuvYxvfQCfUBKr
> 1uzYL7J529eS/9i0/3QSv9Y=
> =CbcJ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>




More information about the Snort-users mailing list