|
|||||||||||
|
Re: IDS is dead, etc
From: Bennett Todd <bet(at)rahul.net>
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 13:40:21 EDT
2003-08-08T13:24:46 Scott Wimer:
Agreed. > Where we differ is in our estimation of the level of vulnerability of
I'm not convinced this is true. I feel that you're putting words in my mouth. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you seem to be responding to a claim that one can have perfectly secure software. I've not made such a claim, and will stand beside you refuting it. Perhaps once again my poor choice of words in that initial statement "perfect firewall" is biting me. > The number of systems that are backdoored -- today, and the number
Sure --- but unless the black hats are the folks selling the IDSe, the IDSes won't catch these secret exploits anyway. > Although, some will argue that the more behavioral oriented NIDS
IDSes detect known exploits, and sometimes heretofore unknown exploits of clearly known and understood vulnerabilities. -Bennett
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 23 2006 - 14:01:16 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||