>
> Task 3.9, Bullet #4. I am requested to create a code red signature looking
>> for regexps in urls. I did a "service http" type but SG states doing a
>> "String TCP"-type. Why? Am I wrong?
>>
>
> You can use it.
>

Thanks. I still try to understand how close to DSG-solution I need to be to
be "ok". ;)

>
>
>
>>  Same tasks states "if it hits a web server on VLAN8". But I cant see in
>> the SG that this alerts triggers only for traffic to that vlan. Without
>> doing any per-iprange-specific-thing this would trigger for all traffic
>> passing thru vs1. right? My idea was to ADD action to that sig with
>> something opposite/similar to event action filters, but is there no way to
>> do that?
>>
>
> You can filter the vlan traffic on the switch. Irrespective of whether you
> are using promiscuous or inline, you can configure the switch to control the
> vlans that are sent for inspection. If you need to control on the IPS, then
> you can opt for VLAN groups.
>
>

Yeah, but that is done by manipulating the total stream of traffic going
to/thru the ips. I was more looking for a way to do "I have all this traffic
going into my IPS. I have a signature that triggers on specific behavior and
takes some actions, like logging. Besides from that I want it to also take
another action (like alert or drop inline) IF that behavior is with a
specific IP-address as destination IP".

Can that be done?

>
>
>>
>> Next bullet with FTP-signature, same thing. logging all ftp dele-commands
>> passing thru vs0 will not be as granular as requested, "...when it detects a
>> file being deleted on the ftp-server 10.4.4.100 from vlan5".
>>
>
> Same comment as above.
>

I don´t understand. Tyson or someone from ipexpert, can you give me feedback
on this?



>
>>
>> Last bullet. "Do not use IP or IP ranges for defining Vlan 7". I
>> interprete that as "do not specify it by ip-addresses" which made me
>> confused. Then I saw that the proposed solution was to define the range
>> (which we wrent supposed to do?) as a variable and enter the variable
>> instead of the range itself directly.
>>
>> I guess I have problems understanding the scope of some tasks.
>>
>> This frustrates me a lot. I struggle all the time trying to understand the
scope of some tasks within the workbook. I have explained my thought in this
blog post. I´d very much like lots of input on this.

http://blogg.kvistofta.nu/todays-question-whats-within-the-scope-of-the-task/





> when verifying the large-icmp-signature I get the same result as DSG:
>> "!!.!.!.!!..!!!..!!.!.!.!!..!!". But why? I expected to see ".............".
>> The action is not "deny *some* packets inline". ;-)
>>
>
This confuses me more than anything else right now. I guess I will not be
able to sleep tonight, when I shut my eyes I will see this annoying line of
random dots and exclamation-marks making fun of me. ;)

Br Jimmy
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to