Below I have included a posting to the "snort-sigs" list, which is a
mailing list to discuss the development of rules for the Snort IDS.  The
author of the email explained some of the differences between Snort and
other pattern matching IDS systems, and RealSecure and Proventia.  ISS
X-Force had no such trouble developing protection against ProFTPD
attacks because the PAM, or "Protocol Analysis Module" that is the heart
of all ISS protection products is designed to detect exploits and
attacks in all of their complexity, not simply by searching for a static
pattern or regular expression.

Vulnerabilities and exploits today are so much more complex that even
those released two years ago.  Modern exploits and attacks are no longer
simply sending too much data for one specific buffer and causing it to
overflow.  Many modern exploits appear nearly identical to normal,
everyday traffic.  These attacks are also not the simple one or two
packet attacks of the past.  Many new vulnerabilities can be exploited
in several different ways, like recent Sendmail overflows (for which no
complete Snort rules exist).  Hackers are figuring out ways to bypass
simple string-matching or pattern-matching IDS systems by simply
modifying their exploits.  More robust detection mechanisms including
protocol analysis must be used in order to catch the first exploit, and
all the variations that may appear later.

Regards,
===============================
Daniel Ingevaldson
Engineering Manager, X-Force R&D
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
404-236-3160
 
Internet Security Systems, Inc.
The Power to Protect
http://www.iss.net 
===============================


-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 3:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

While trying to reproduce the recent ProFTPD vulnerability described by 
ISS ( http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/154 ) I have come to the 
conclusion that there is no way to write a concise Snort rule that 
would detect the condition of the vulnerability. The condition is that 
you have a large number of newlines (around 600 or more) in a single 
1024-byte aligned chunk of the file being downloaded in ASCII. It 
doesn't matter if the newlines are contiguous or if they have other 
content randomly interspersed. A simple way to logically detect this is 
to count the number of occurances of 0x0A in a packet, no matter how 
they are arranged. However, there doesn't seem to be a way to do this 
with Snort.  

It seems when you are dealing with parsers in software, there are often 
conditions you get into where a particular character causes buffer 
sizes to be miscalculated (think sendmail prescan vulns), and that 
these conditions are not easily detected by Snort because of the myriad 
of ways they can be formatted, even though it seems as if it would be 
easy to spot. Is there a solution to this problem utilizing existing 
Snort features?


-Joe

--

Joe Stewart, GCIH 
Senior Security Researcher
LURHQ Corporation
http://www.lurhq.com/


_______________________________________________
ISSForum mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

TO UNSUBSCRIBE OR CHANGE YOUR SUBSCRIPTION, go to 
https://atla-mm1.iss.net/mailman/listinfo

Reply via email to