RE: IDS and forensics

From: Kelly, Lee (kellylat_private)
Date: Fri Jan 24 2003 - 07:57:45 PST

  • Next message: perrierorat_private: "Re: IDS and forensics"

    RealSecure has the capability to capture the packets, the issue is it
    typically exponentially grows the size of the database. Thus you are
    required to purge, or offload, more frequently. Not sure about netprowler.
    
    Thank You,
    
    Lee Kelly, CISSP
    Manager, Assessment Services
    Fortrex Technologies, Inc.
    1-877-367-8739 (Office)
    240-994-6786 (Cell)
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: H C [mailto:keydet89at_private]
    Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 10:34
    To: forensicsat_private
    Subject: IDS and forensics
    
    I'm interested in other's views of network IDS systems
    when looking at incident response and forensics
    activities.
    
    This comes up from my hands-on dealings w/ IDSs like
    RealSecure and NetProwler.  These systems provide
    alerts, but don't keep the actual packets that
    initiate the alerts.  I've done some research w/
    NetProwler specifically, and haven't been able to find
    any explicit definition or descriptions of the alerts.
     So I'll see an alert for "MS RPC portmapper small
    packets", but I have no way of determining what
    "small" is...and since we do a lot of DCOM on that
    subnet, I'd really like to see what the actual
    contents of the packet are...but can't through
    NetProwler.  I know I could load up snort or tcpdump,
    and do captures that way, but Symantec recently
    announced that it's no longer supporting NetProwler,
    so...
    
    About a year ago I was working w/ RealSecure and had
    the same issues...couldn't see what the packet
    contents were, nor could I see what the actual details
    of the filter were.  On top of that, the ability to
    create user-defined filters is extremely limited.
    
    What this leads to is the question of how useful such
    systems are in the face of network forensics.  If the
    packet contents themselves aren't saved in some way,
    but only used to trigger an alert, then how suitable
    are such systems for forensics?  To take a step back,
    if the signatures themselves aren't viewable, and only
    the alert, then how does the admin *really* determine
    what happened?  In most cases, they'd be at the mercy
    of whatever info the IDS console provides.
    
    Thoughts?
    
    Carv
    
    __________________________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
    http://mailplus.yahoo.com
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    For more information on this free incident handling, management
    and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    
    
    
    
    ..
    .
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    For more information on this free incident handling, management 
    and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 24 2003 - 13:02:06 PST