Session hijacking is tricky business, and IDS monitoring is only a calculated guess based on assumptions of traffic patterns. The Cisco IDS did a good job of monitoring T-Sight session hijacking, but in several cases, alarms were missed and a few attacks went completely unnoticed. For example, if the original client never communicated during the hijacking or if a client connection was reset before ACK storms occurred, the 3250 signature would never be triggered, and the attack would go through unnoticed. This is not the fault of IDS; it is just that not enough suspicious traffic is sent to provide a reliable detection. Prevention is the only true protection, and IDS or a super-human watching Ethereal packet sniffing traffic like the Matrix screen saver are too unreliable for all possibilities.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Compliance Is Not Security": A Critical Examination of Modern Cybersecurity Postures
Abstract This paper challenges the conventional wisdom that regulatory compliance equates to robust security. By deconstructing common organ...
-
Summarization of hundreds of comments on Reddit. Ineffective Service: The users explicitly states, "Confirmed that it doesn't w...
-
Based on a review of the provided Privacy Policy , here are some potential legal implications and issues that should be addressed: Scope a...
No comments:
Post a Comment