Re: Packet Performance Monitor

Russ <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.security.ids.snort.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>

On 10/3/16 3:01 PM, Mike Cox wrote:
> Thanks Russ, much appreciated.   This kind of begs the question, when 
> PPM suspends a rule, does the single rule get suspended or the entire 
> tree (which could be multiple rules)?
The whole tree.

BTW, Snort++ adds the first rule in the tree to the latency event logs 
in the update later this week.  Something may be done in Snort as well.  
TBD.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Mike Cox
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Russ <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Hey Mike,
>
>     This has been a "feature" of Snort for quite a while and likely
>     will only be fixed in Snort++, which inherited the issue.  It
>     arose when we added a performance feature to compile all the rules
>     that share a fast pattern match end state into a single tree that
>     can be evaluated more quickly than iterating over the individual
>     rules.  Such rules tend to have a lot in common and the common
>     part is evaluated just once.  Consequently, when the tree triggers
>     a latency event, it could be one or more rules that are at fault. 
>     I'm thinking we will add a mapping and report the index that can
>     be used to find the rules.  This is in our backlog.
>
>     Thanks
>     Russ
>
>
>     On 9/26/16 8:27 AM, Mike Cox wrote:
>>     Perhaps snort-sigs was the wrong place to post this.  Removing
>>     them and adding snort-devel.
>>
>>     Thanks.
>>
>>     Mike Cox
>>
>>     On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Mike Cox <[email protected]
>>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>         I've been messing around with the Packet Performance Monitor
>>         (PPM) preprocessor and it seem like a nice capability of Snort.
>>
>>         However, when I configure it to suspend/disable expensive
>>         rules once the thresholds are reached, how do I know which
>>         rule was suspended?  I see it generates the GID 134 alert
>>         along with the packet it was considering at the time but I
>>         need to be able to know what rule was suspended so I can:
>>
>>         1) account for and correlate the coverage gap (if necessary)
>>         2) tune the rule
>>
>>         Thanks!
>>
>>         Mike Cox
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Snort-devel mailing list
>>     [email protected]
>>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-devel
>>     <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-devel>
>>     Archive:
>>     http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=snort-devel
>>     <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=snort-devel>
>>
>>     Please visithttp://blog.snort.org  for the latest news about Snort!
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most 
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot

_______________________________________________
Snort-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-devel
Archive:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=snort-devel

Please visit http://blog.snort.org for the latest news about Snort!
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.