[Snort-users] Port Aggregator Tap alternatives for snort sensor

Stephen Reese rsreese at ...11827...
Thu Oct 2 10:09:50 EDT 2008

> Sounds like an excellent case for the use of BPF filters and multiple
> instances of snort.
> instance 1 - snort <params> net 10.0.0./8
> instance 2 - snort <params> not net 10.0.0./8
> This way you will make SURE that anything the first instance doesn't
> grab the second one will.
>> I can use the same sensor but then all of the traffic would also be
>>  piled into one database and/or alerts.
> Regarding the database, you can use the sensor_id (not sure if that is
> exactly right) parameter of the output database plug-in to identify
> which instance of snort logged each alert in BASE or whatever you are
> using.

Is anyone have a configuration using multiple network taps and one box
for snort?

---internet----> TAP ---router---> TAP ----network cloud---

I'm planning on using the following configuration:

var HOME_NET [,]

The 68.x.x.x is my external IP where there is a sensor so I can see
all of the traffic coming in. The 172.x.x.x is for my internal network
where there will be a sensor placed after the router. Is this the
proper way to do this using one snort process or should I use two
snort processes with separate config files?


More information about the Snort-users mailing list