Re: Can Zeek be installed as in-line IPS?
Patrick Kelley <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.detection.bro |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CA+WAcdQsg9h+u-8uyUSGh2jm2Lrh_8H+i6n4Cnx3nG2nmgnukg@mail.gmail.com> |
Somedays I wish... As I sit here reviewing the deployment and Change Management notes for a ASA/FirePower, two SourceFire 7120's, two 8250's, and two VM FirePowers. Orgs are still trying to get ROI on some of this stuff. It's not AI/ML or Blockchain, but it's still running. On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 2:39 PM Edgmand, Craig <[email protected]> wrote: > Didn’t IDS die circa 2005? J > > > > *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Richard > Bejtlich > *Sent:* Monday, March 18, 2019 1:28 PM > *To:* Patrick Kelley <[email protected]> > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Zeek] Can Zeek be installed as in-line IPS? > > > > **External Email - Please verify sender email address before responding.** > > The PCI requirement is for IDS or IPS, which is unfortunate because they > are totally different. I'm surprised IPS is even a market segment anymore. > At this point it's really just a firewall feature. There's so much more > that can be done with a passive observation platform like Zeek, when you > don't have to worry about making line-speed judgements. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Richard > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:50 PM Patrick Kelley < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Yes. Many. > > > > PCI-DSS 11.4 comes up quite often. Whether we have consensus on the > validity and utility of an IPS or not, it comes up in every single PCI > audit. > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:40 PM Richard Bejtlich <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Yes, as Seth said, I said IPS. Is anyone really deploying IPS now? I only > see Palo Alto firewalls, etc. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Richard > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:02 PM Seth Hall <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 18 Mar 2019, at 11:30, Patrick Kelley wrote: > > > I still see the same issues we had on networks 10 years ago. It is > > reduced, due to HTTPS and some SMTP, sure. Dead... not really. > > To be fair, he did say IPS. In my opinion IPS has always been in a > weird spot where the definition isn't terribly clear (block a single > packet in-flight? block a connection after a determination is made? > ...etc). > > I think everyone here will agree that the visibility provided by Zeek is > useful even on modern networks and that tail of completely unencrypted > traffic is awfully long. :) > > .Seth > > -- > Seth Hall * Corelight, Inc * www.corelight.com > <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corelight.com&data=02%7C01%7Ccraig.edgmand%40okstate.edu%7Ceb633696233247bb889908d6abd0c3a5%7C2a69c91de8494e34a230cdf8b27e1964%7C0%7C0%7C636885310457070759&sdata=tf5QlbJafXoIAE6FTNN0ETdKn5oixhcp%2BIgMBoGGZRY%3D&reserved=0> > > > > > -- > > Richard Bejtlich > > Principal Security Strategist, Corelight > > > > > -- > > > > *Patrick Kelley, CISSP, C|EH, ITIL* > > *CTO* > > [email protected] > > (o) 770-224-6482 > > > > *The limit to which you have accepted being comfortable is the limit to > which you have grown. Accept new challenges as an opportunity to enrich > yourself and not as a point of potential failure.* > > > > > > > -- > > Richard Bejtlich > > Principal Security Strategist, Corelight > -- *Patrick Kelley, CISSP, C|EH, ITIL* *CTO* [email protected] (o) 770-224-6482 *The limit to which you have accepted being comfortable is the limit to which you have grown. Accept new challenges as an opportunity to enrich yourself and not as a point of potential failure.* _______________________________________________ Zeek mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/zeek