On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 11:29:51AM -0400, Anton Chuvakin wrote:
> My first impression was that it is a page defacement, so outrageous some
> claims are. For instance, did you know that IDS actually _cause_ incident
> response to happen? :-) Or this gem : "Money Slated for Intrusion
> Detection Should Be Invested in Firewalls"?
>
I do agree that using IDS as a primary meens of thwarting hackers is a
bad idea but I still beleave it should be part of the package. Depending
on one "holy grail" application will eventualy leave you flat on your
face. Thnk about it, IDS can aleart you to an agresive scan form one
machine looking for the "vunerable ports". Granted all you can do it
flag the ip at that time and watch it but at least you have a starting
point. Also when, not if your company gets cracked, don't you think IDS
will make the forensics a little easier. They are an important part of
security but I've seen to many times someone puts all thier trust in one
type of security. Planning and research is the best solution. It might
require you to strain some braincells but it'll be worth it in the end.
--
Jerry M. Howell II

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
INTRUSION PREVENTION: READY FOR PRIME TIME?

IntruShield now offers unprecedented Intrusion IntelligenceTM capabilities
- including intrusion identification, relevancy, direction, impact and analysis
- enabling a path to prevention.

Download the latest white paper "Intrusion Prevention: Myths, Challenges, and Requirements" at:
http://www.securityfocus.com/IntruVert-focus-ids2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------

[ reply ]