SNORT-RULES: Coba Menulis Rules untuk pemula

Sumber: courses.umass.edu/cs415/labs/lab2/415-lab2-Snort.pdf

Alat

• server dengan snort yang di instalasi

Bacaan

• www.snort.org
• http://www.snort.org/docs/FAQ.txt - Snort FAQ
• http://www.snort.org/docs/snort_manual/node2.html - Snort Overview
• http://www.snort.org/docs/snort_manual/node16.html - How to Write Snort Rules and Keep Your Sanity

Snort is similar to tcpdump, but has cleaner output and a more versatile rule language. Just like tcpdump, snort will listen to a particular interface, or read a packet trace from a file. Download the tracefile from the course web server and place it in the /tmp directory. Commonly security administrators are asked to look at a packet trace to analyze a recent attack. In this lab, we are going to learn how to use snort to read traces and learn how to write new snort rules. The trace doesn't node contain a particular attack in progress, but instead several different distinct types of questionable packets.

Beberapa perintah bermanfaat

snort –help

snort –r /tmp/snort-ids-lab.log -P 5000 –c /tmp/rules –e –X -v

Reading the help file, write in your lab write-up what each of those flags should do. Some newer versions of snort have problems while reading incorrect checksums on packets. You may have to add “config checksum_mode : none” to the top of your rules file if you run in to this checksum problem. The intention of snort is to alert the administrator when any rules match an incoming packet. Administrators can keep a large list of rules in a file, much like a firewall rule set may be kept. All the rules are generally about one line in length and follow the same format. Here's an example

log tcp
any any -> 128.119.245.66 23 (msg: "telnet to www machine!";)

This rule tells snort to record ("log") all packets destined to the telnet port on 128.119.245.66 and to include a user readable string. This makes sense if that port is turned off in inetd.conf; there shouldn't be any traffic. In general, all rules are of this form:

action protocol address port direction address port (rule option)

In our example,

• the action was "log". We could simply write to a common alert file with the

command "alert". The difference between log and alert is that each IP address gets its own logfile for later analysis, while all alerts are stored in one common file.

• The protocol field can be "tcp", "udp",or "icmp". "Any" is not allowed.
• Addresses can be specified in CIDR notation
• ports can be given as ranges and with the "!" operator. For example, the

example below (stolen from the documentation!) logs all packets to a range of machine not on ports 6000-6010.

log tcp any any -> 192.168.1.0/24 !6000:6010

• The direction operator is either "->" or "<-"or "<>" for bi-directional traffic between two addresses.

The rule options specify tasks to be performed if the addresses and protocols match. For example, here's a snort rule to catch all ICMP echo messages:

alert tcp any any -> 192.168.10.2 any (itype: 8; msg: "ping detected";)

Run this single rule on the packet trace. The results will be written to /var/log/snort/alert. In your write up, state why the value 8 was used. And, include the output of that command. Note that serveral options can be llisted in the parentheses. Each must end with a semicolon, even if there is only one rule. Other useful options include, "content", "flags" , "ipoption". More are list in the "writing snort rules" document.

What to hand in Question 1. There are seven other distinct packet signatures in the packet trace file. In other words, there are 30 packets total in the packet trace. There are 8 rules that will uniquely identify the 8 different packet signatures. You already have one of the rules. Look though the packet trace and figure out the other rules. Look for more general signatures where you can, however, be careful not to write too general signatures. Part of the intent of the lab is to teach you how to write effective rules. It is easy to write a rules that matches all IP datagrams regardless of content, but this would be a very ineffective rule at detecting anomalous or malicious activity. Include in your write up the 7 other rules you came up with as well as the /var/log/snort/alert output. (The alert file is append each time snort has output, so you want to erase the alert file before each snort run while experiementing with different rules.) Be sure to include a descriptive message ("msg") with each alert. T he rules you write may be instructive, but not the most useful for a real system. Question 2. Once you've completed that trace, state how each of following real rules from the snort home page work:

alert tcp $HOME_NET 23 -> $EXTERNAL_NET any (msg:"TELNET login incorrect";
content:"Login incorrect"; flags: A+; reference:arachnids,127;)

alert udp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HOME_NET 53 (msg:"EXPLOIT BIND Tsig
Overflow Attempt"; content:"|80 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 01 3F 00 01 02|/bin/sh";)

alert tcp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HOME_NET any (msg:"SCAN FIN"; flags: F;
reference:arachnids,27;)

alert tcp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HOME_NET 23 (msg:"MISC linux rootkit attempt
lrkr0x";flags: A+; content:"lrkr0x";)5. alert tcp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HTTP_SERVERS 80 (msg:"WEB-CGI view-source
access ";flags: A+; content:"/view-source?../../../../../../../etc/passwd";
nocase;reference:cve,CVE-1999-0174;)

alert icmp any any -> any any (msg:"ICMP Source Quench"; itype: 4; icode: 0;)

alert tcp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HOME_NET 53 (msg:"DNS EXPLOIT named
overflow";flags:
A+;content:"thisissometempspaceforthesockinaddrinyeahyeahiknowthisislamebutanyway
whocareshorizongotitworkingsoalliscool"; reference:cve,CVE-1999-0833;)

alert tcp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HOME_NET 139 (msg:"NETBIOS SMB
ADMIN$access"; flow:to_server,established; content:"\\ADMIN$|00 41 3a 00|";
reference:arachnids,340; classtype:attempted-admin; sid:532; rev:4;)

alert ip $EXTERNAL_NET $SHELLCODE_PORTS -> $HOME_NET any
(msg:"SHELLCODE sparc NOOP"; content:"|a61c c013 a61c c013 a61c c013 a61c
c013|"; reference:arachnids,355; classtype:shellcode-detect; sid:646; rev:4;)

Phatbot Analysis

Read the analysis of the phatbot (sometimes referred to as polybot) Trojan at http://www.lurhq.com/phatbot.html. Question 3. As with question 2, evaluate the snort signatures contained in the above document. Comment on the effectiveness of these signatures. Question 4. The waste protocol used in the phatbot Trojan originally included the capability of encrypting the peer-to-peer data stream. What effect would this have on the effectiveness of the above signature. Question 5. Do some additional research about the phatbot/polybot Trojan. Assume that phatbot develops the capability of encrypting the data stream. Phatbot has a consistent and obvious signature of network activity across multiple packets that allow it to be detected even with out access to content of the data stream. The signature may traverse multiple packets. Snort rules generally deal with packet-by-packet data signatures. This question is intentionally vague and is designed to have you apply some of the skills you have acquired to tackling a real world problem such as being able to detect malicious activity even when you do not have access to the content of the data streams. Explain in a few paragraphs what other tools and techniques you may use to detect this signature. Provide enough detail so that a campus network administrator could follow your explanation to deploy your system in production. Question 6. What techniques would you use to minimize the number of false positives with your technique described above. 4 Evaluation Question 7: How hard was this lab? Was it fair? How would you change it to improve it?

Referensi

• courses.umass.edu/cs415/labs/lab2/415-lab2-Snort.pdf