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

Michael Scheidell michael.scheidell at ...8144...
Tue Feb 1 14:35:33 EST 2011


On 2/1/11 1:56 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
> That's not right.  I'll bug this on our side for our developers to 
> take a look.
> Joel
>
Would you consider it a bug to fail on a signal 30, if system build with 
targetbased, and doesn't have a targets.xml file?

You might ask, why send a signal 30 to reload the targets.xml file if 
you don't have system compiled with --enable-targetbased?

(freebsd sends a signal 30 is you send it a SIGUSR1)

I might ask, if --enable-targetbased is NOT specified, why include the 
code to look for the targets.xml file?



-- 
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/20110201/8bf06ca9/attachment.html>


More information about the Snort-users mailing list