[Snort-users] Rules with SDF options cannot have other detection options in the same rule

Michael Scheidell michael.scheidell at ...8144...
Tue Feb 1 13:53:03 EST 2011


On 2/1/11 1:48 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
> And the only difference is to add in the --enable-flexresp3?
>
> Joel
yes.  then everything is fine.
I might mention that I also have to oinkmaster out resp:* rules also, 
but that I expected.  I didn't expect sensitive data rules to fail.

I am regres testing ports build options that a user can select.
looking for combination that don't work, won't build, or won't work with 
VRT rules, ET rules, etc.


-- 
Michael Scheidell, CTO
o: 561-999-5000
d: 561-948-2259
ISN: 1259*1300
 >*| *SECNAP Network Security Corporation

    * Certified SNORT Integrator
    * 2008-9 Hot Company Award Winner, World Executive Alliance
    * Five-Star Partner Program 2009, VARBusiness
    * Best in Email Security,2010: Network Products Guide
    * King of Spam Filters, SC Magazine 2008


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap(r). 
For Information please see http://www.secnap.com/products/spammertrap/
______________________________________________________________________  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.snort.org/pipermail/snort-users/attachments/20110201/1f26b14a/attachment.html>


More information about the Snort-users mailing list