[Snort-users] Reliability of signatures

Joel Esler jesler at ...1935...
Fri Feb 4 10:32:52 EST 2011


On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Martin Roesch <roesch at ...1935...>wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Jim Hranicky <jfh at ...5250...> wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 09:13:12 -0600
> > Martin Holste <mcholste at ...11827...> wrote:
> >
> >> > Seems like there'd almost need to be a central place that various
> >> > entities could report their findings. I know we've got rules that we
> >> > rely on heavily and work very well for us, but other than mailing
> lists
> >> > there's no place to report our findings.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hm, you mean like a vote up/down system like StackOverflow.com?  That
> >> could be really interesting.  It would be very valuable to see what
> >> others are finding to be helpful.
> >
> > Sure, something like that - that would actually be very cool.
>
> I like that idea too.  It'd make a lot of sense to integrate it into
> snort.org - in fact there's probably a lot of data about Snort
> detection performance, config options and rule quality we could put up
> there.  Communication favors the defender...
>
>
I would think it would need to have some kind of automatic reporting method,
perhaps with manual commenting?

J
-- 
Joel Esler | 706-231-1451 | http://blog.snort.org | http://blog.clamav.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.snort.org/pipermail/snort-users/attachments/20110204/42fdae77/attachment.html>


More information about the Snort-users mailing list