Pete, one of the questions I had right away when I looked at the documentation accompanying the software package was about the communication channel.
The documentation clearly pointed out that ports 25 is the default and that 80 is selectable, but didn't go further. I just answered my own question by sniffing the traffic... The question was: Ok, so I can govern the port, but will my stateful firewall like it? The answer is yes and no; if my firewall is expecting SMTP application layer traffic outbound on port 25/TCP then it won't like Sniffer's GBU/synch traffic. Which means that a firewall: * That does outbound packet filtering will be fine if it lets out 25/TCP. * That does stateful inspection will be fine if it lets out 25/TCP. * That does application layer filtering of SMTP on 25/TCP will not be fine. I suspect that the same would be true of 80/TCP if Sniffer is so configured. I doubt that this is a problem for most environments, but it is an important point for environments that have application layer filtering. These environments would be able to update their Sniffer database, but not participate in GBU, nor would they be able to use the synch system to report their logs or spam samples. Presumably, the affected environment could implement a new rule or override the application inspection and drop down their security to just allowing outbound 25/TCP without applying SMTP application layer inspection. Andrew. > -----Original Message----- > From: Message Sniffer Community > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 5:35 AM > To: Message Sniffer Community > Subject: [sniffer] Re: Beta > > Hello John, > > Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 1:41:18 AM, you wrote: > > >> Our SYNC server software rejects connections by default. If an SNF > >> node follows the expected connection protocols and authenticates > >> properly and consistently then it will be allowed to > communicate with > >> the system. If it fails to do any of these things or looks > suspicious > >> in any way then it will be automatically black listed for > increasingly > >> extended periods and potentially null routed by our fire-walls. The > >> security mechanisms are fully automatic and constantly monitored. > > > If something goes wrong on my server, either by a mistake I > make in a > > configuration file or a bug or whatever, and my server in > connecting to the > > SYNC server should be rejected and subsequently black > listed, is there a > > notification that takes place that some one will review to > see if that > > sniffer license is otherwise valid and otherwise no known > problems are seen > > so that I will then be notified saying "hey there is a > problem contact us" > > so that the problem can be resolved? > > Yes. > > The system is completely automated and reliable. There is nothing to > be concerned about. Quite simply, nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go > wrong... go.. > > Seriously though-- > > In order to be black-listed by our system you would have to be abusing > the SNF software or using some alternative software to attempt to gain > access or deny access to the SYNC servers. Otherwise the most you > could do would be to loose contact for some time. > > That said, if any system does something to become black-listed then > you can be sure it will have our attention. > > It is basically impossible for you to cause a properly functioning SNF > node to become black-listed by altering the configuration file. It is > far more likely that your SNF node would simply fail to connect. > > Chances are that if you were making an adjustment that could cause > this you would also be watching to make sure that things were working > correctly when you finished. > > In case you did cause the system to lose it's connection with us, the > system is designed so that SNF nodes will remain reliable and > effective for extended periods even if they are unable to contact the > SYNC server. It is also designed to recover gracefully when the > problem is corrected. > > The GBUdb system is highly effective even when it does not share it's > information with the other SNF nodes. Each GBUdb node learns first > about it's local traffic. As long as your SNF rulebase file is up to > date - or even close to being up to date, your system is likely to be > very effective at filtering spam. > > If your SNF/GBUdb node becomes detached from the main system for an > extended period, it will degrade in it's performance. Once the problem > is corrected it should recover in a very short time. > > In the event we detect any IPs being black listed or acting > suspiciously we will be watching closely so that we can analyze any > potential threats and take appropriate actions. If we can identify a > customer involved in such a case we will contact them to investigate > and correct the problem. > > Locally, your status reports indicate when the last sync event > occurred. This is one of the ways you can check the status of your > system. Consider this example from recent telemetry: > > <timers> > <run started="20070928174736" elapsed="1620714"/> > <sync latest="20071017115919" elapsed="11"/> > <save latest="20071017111334" elapsed="2756"/> > <condense latest="20071017081746" elapsed="13304"/> > </timers> > > You can see when the last sync event occurred (about 11 seconds ago in > this case): > > <sync latest="20071017115919" elapsed="11"/> > > We plan to encourage the development of third party tools for > monitoring and analyzing SNF system data. In addition we plan to build > monitoring and analysis services of our own to include features that > will notify system administrators when something doesn't look quite > right. > > If you (anyone) develop something nice for displaying and/or > monitoring SNF status data then please share it with the SNF > community. > > In the mean time - we have done extensive testing and monitoring > throughout the development process. High availability is (has always > been) a design requirement and we're confident SNF can deliver that. > > Hope this helps, > > _M > > -- > Pete McNeil > Chief Scientist, > Arm Research Labs, LLC. > > > ############################################################# > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <sniffer@sortmonster.com>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
