[Snort-users] Unified Logging - BASE - Portscans

Michael Steele michaels at ...9077...
Tue Jul 26 22:21:51 EDT 2011


James,

Ok, I restarted two completely separate instances, and they are running
simultaneously:

VM1: Snort / MySQL / BASE / Unified Logging
VM2: Snort / MySQL / BASE / Output Database Logging

I am now receiving portscans into the portscan.log file on each VM.

VM2 is the only instance that displays the portscans in the BASE console.

VM1 is configured with Unified2 logging and is receiving portscans into the
portscan.log file but BASE is not processing them.

I'm guessing someone needs to jump in here that has some knowledge of how
BASE processes the portscans in order to find out why portscans are being
logged into the portscan.log file, but not processed when Unified2 logging
is used.

Kindest regards,
Michael...


-----Original Message-----
From: James Lay [mailto:jlay at ...13475...] 
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 10:28 PM
To: Michael Steele; Snort
Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Unified Logging - BASE - Portscans

Done and done...nmaped from another netblock I control...sanitized output.

Time: 07/25-20:25:10.421362
event_id: 1
netblock -> external.ip (portscan) TCP Portscan Priority Count: 5 Connection
Count: 59 IP Count: 1 Scanner IP Range: netblock ip range Port/Proto Count:
62 Port/Proto Range: 21:55600


My output lines in snort.conf:

output alert_syslog: LOG_AUTH LOG_ALERT
output alert_fast: snortalert.fast
output log_tcpdump: snort.pcap
output unified2: filename snortalert.unified

Base still doesn't seem to be able to read it though, which is kind of a
drag (even after changing perms to 0644).


James



On 7/25/11 4:45 PM, "Michael Steele" <michaels at ...9077...> wrote:

>James,
>
>My portscan.log is 0 bytes. If I turn unified logging off, and turn the 
>output database plugin on, the portscan.log file will populated with 
>portscan alerts.
>
>This is strange, so you have unified logging turned on and you are 
>receiving data into the portscan.log file? Can you verify that it's 
>really working by stopping the snort service deleting the file and 
>restarting the snort service to see if alerts will continue to populate 
>the portscan .log file?
>
>Kindest regards,
>Michael...
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Lay, James [mailto:james.lay at ...15009...]
>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 6:00 PM
>To: Michael Steele; snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>Subject: RE: [Snort-users] Unified Logging - BASE - Portscans
>
>Hi Michael,
>
>Now that's odd...my sfportscan line:
>
>preprocessor sfportscan: proto  { all } memcap { 10000000 } sense_level 
>{ low } logfile { portscan.log }
>
>And a tail of my portscan.log:
>
>Time: 07/25-06:37:31.148528
>event_id: 750
>92.126.55.42 -> external.ip (portscan) UDP Portscan Priority Count: 45 
>Connection Count: 86 IP Count: 5 Scanner IP Range:
>74.50.52.136:92.126.55.42
>Port/Proto Count: 5 Port/Proto Range: 6881:44898
>
>
>I'm betting this is a different format from 2009's sfportscan?  I dunno 
>:(
>
>James
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Steele [mailto:michaels at ...9077...]
>> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 3:23 PM
>> To: Lay, James; snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>> Subject: RE: [Snort-users] Unified Logging - BASE - Portscans
>> 
>> James,
>> 
>> Thanks for taking a look. I know there a LOT of users on all 
>> platforms
>still
>> using BASE as their console. I was talking to Jason and he tells me
>that
>> when unified2 logging is used, all alerts go into the unified log
>file, and
>> I'm assuming that includes portscans.
>> 
>> Seems someone would have came up with a solution to view portscans in
>the
>> BASE console using unified logging.
>> 
>> The below is used in order for BASE to grab the portscans, at least 
>> it worked with 'output database':
>> preprocessor sfportscan: proto { all } memcap { 10000000 } 
>> sense_level
>{ low
>> } logfile { portscan.log }
>> 
>> When the above ' preprocessor sfportscan:' is used with unified
>logging all
>> it does is create the portscan.log file and never injects portscans
>into the
>> log file.
>> 
>> I'm not even real sure if the ' preprocessor sfportscan:' is even
>needed
>> using unified logging method, and I'm not real sure how to turn
>portscans on
>> wnen using unified2 logging:
>> preprocessor sfportscan: proto { all } memcap { 10000000 } 
>> sense_level
>{ low
>> }
>> 
>> And will the above log portscans to the unified log file?
>> 
>> Kindest regards,
>> Michael...
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lay, James [mailto:james.lay at ...15009...]
>> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 3:29 PM
>> To: Michael Steele; snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>> Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Unified Logging - BASE - Portscans
>> 
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Michael Steele [mailto:michaels at ...9077...]
>> > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 9:13 PM
>> > To: snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>> > Subject: [Snort-users] Unified Logging - BASE - Portscans
>> >
>> > I noticed that moving from output database to unified logging that
>> portscans
>> > are no longer displayed in the BASE console.
>> >
>> > Is there a solution to get this feature back to working in BASE?
>> >
>> > Kindest regards,
>> > Michael...
>> 
>> Michael, FWIW I tried in vain to get this to fly at home...I have the 
>> portscan.log file being created as well as pointing to the right spot
>in
>> base_conf.php, but nothing shows up.  I suspect it's a difference in
>the
>> file format from the time BASE was made.  I'm sure an enterprising
>soul
>> could make the mods to the php files, but that wouldn't be me ;)  For
>now I
>> do without portscan info...BASE gives me what I need without.
>> 
>> James
>> 
>>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>-
>----
>> --
>> Storage Efficiency Calculator
>> This modeling tool is based on patent-pending intellectual property
>that has
>> been used successfully in hundreds of IBM storage optimization 
>> engage- ments, worldwide.  Store less, Store more with what you own, 
>> Move data
>to
>> the right place. Try It Now!
>> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427378/
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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=snort-users
>> 
>> Please see http://www.snort.org/docs for documentation
>> 
>
>
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>----
>Storage Efficiency Calculator
>This modeling tool is based on patent-pending intellectual property 
>that has been used successfully in hundreds of IBM storage optimization 
>engage- ments, worldwide.  Store less, Store more with what you own, 
>Move data to the right place. Try It Now!
>http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427378/
>_______________________________________________
>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=snort-users
>
>Please see http://www.snort.org/docs for documentation



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Magic Quadrant for Content-Aware Data Loss Prevention Research study
explores the data loss prevention market. Includes in-depth analysis on the
changes within the DLP market, and the criteria used to evaluate the
strengths and weaknesses of these DLP solutions.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51385063/
_______________________________________________
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=snort-users

Please see http://www.snort.org/docs for documentation






More information about the Snort-users mailing list