[Snort-users] Trigger anomalies (on LXC container versus host)
Al Lewis (allewi)
allewi at ...589...
Sun May 3 15:04:27 EDT 2015
It would help if you could provide some pcaps of the traffic in question. Also a snort.conf or the rules that are involved.
QA Software Engineer
SOURCEfire, Inc. now part of Cisco
9780 Patuxent Woods Drive
Columbia, MD 21046
Phone: (office) 443.430.7112
Email: allewi at ...589...
From: Chris [mailto:berzerkatives at ...11827...]
Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 9:31 AM
To: snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Snort-users] Trigger anomalies (on LXC container versus host)
I'm observing a problematic difference in behaviour between two instances of Snort that are configured identically (recursive diff'ed their config dirs, and compared their initialisation outputs) aside from the required differences (interfaces names) as one is running inside an LXC container, listening to its single virtual interface, and the other instance is on the hypervisor/base OS listening to the bridge interface that all the containers are attached to. The container receives traffic through NAT'ing rules on the hypervisor.
What I see is that certain rules aren't being triggered on the container instance of Snort, but are being triggered on the hypervisor.
This is despite being able to see the packets that trigger these rules appear on both machines (hypervisor and container) using tcpdump to view the respective interfaces that Snort is configured to listen on.
Specifically, the rules that I've noticed are being ignored are those that involve HTTP header inspection, like GET /test.cgi.
Like I said, I can see what look like the EXACT SAME packets on these respective interfaces, so I've tried the following troubleshooting without any luck.
* Switching off Snort on the hypervisor in case it was interfering.
* Creating a rule that triggers for any packet that is considered to
be web traffic (i.e. EXTERNAL any -> HTTP HTTP_PORT) and this
triggers for those packets without issue, so it's not a problem with
those variables being misconfigured.
* Wondering whether LXC doesn't properly isolate the interfaces
somehow, so I tried configuring the container Snort to use the
bridge interface on the hypervisor, however it correctly wasn't able
to use it (as it didn't exist inside the container, of course).
So I'm stuck as to where to go next. The container is where I want Snort to be running, as it's my load balancer (including SSL termination) so that's where I would like to detect and block rogue traffic. The only reason that I run it on the hypervisor is to just see whether any concerning traffic is bypassing the load balancer, and whether undesirable traffic is being generated by services behind it.
Thanks for your time, I really hope someone can shed some light on this frustrating situation. Very happy to answer any questions about the setup, including configuration specifics, though they're essentially vanilla installions on Debian Wheezy straight out of apt.
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
Snort-users mailing list
Snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
Snort-users list archive:
Please visit http://blog.snort.org to stay current on all the latest Snort news!
More information about the Snort-users