Okay, I choose not to respond on Focus-IDS basically, because there are a bunch of tools on there that just, don't get it (TM).
.. And quit writing "Snort" in all caps. It's not "SNORT". Get it right. If you must, check the patents.
But it starts with this:
"Snort also has a lot of unique signatures that people have designed for highly specialized purposes. That is definitely a benefit to some organizations. But, those signatures are only useful in those unique situations. And all the commercial products support custom signatures - so you can do the same thing for your TP or ISS box."
Um, and what "unique situations" are you talking about? All of our signatures can be deployed on any network, and they will work just as well. We have a global impact now, despite how much people are refusing to admit that we are the most widely deployed IDS. Oh yeah, and I can review all my Snort signatures. Can you review all of ISS's? No. Cisco? TP? Yes, you can write your own, but can you see THEIRS?
"Furthermore, Snort rules are developed by volunteers (or Sourcefire)."
Lets try, developed by Sourcefire, (or volunteers). Last time I checked we have a descent sized budget and some SMART people over there in the VRT, and if I remember correctly.. We beat every IDS vendor to the punch on a bunch of the last 0-day Microsoft stuff. Example: (Sasser, Zotob..) We still get a lot of good signatures submitted through us which, we release to community. If the signature is really good, and someone submits it to VRT, and they are willing to have it put on the VRT rule list (because of licensing) it will most definitely be on there.
"As such, SNORT is usually behind the curve on new signatures. ISS, for example, does their own independent security research an has signatures to protect against things that Snort people don't even know about."
More FUD, he must be in sales. Apparently, he's never heard of our VRT, and apparently he didn't read my above post. Go ahead, I'll wait.
"Other vendors buy exploits from the hacker market - again giving them access to vulnerabilities long before it hits the public and subsequently the people who develop SNORT signatures."
Um, we get our "exploits" the same place you all get them. But it doesn't really matter, since we don't write signatures to detect the exploit, we write signatures to detect the vulnerability.
"The 90% thing you're coming up with is just false."
Runs on the list.
"A poorly maintained, tuned or implemented Snort sensor is just as useless as a poorly maintained, tuned, or implemented ISS sensor."
Um, its that way for every IDS.
"Now, I realize I sound like a ISS or TippingPoint sales person."
yes you do.
"And yes, I have a vested interest in such products because my company sells them." -- THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE.
Over the past several years my job here at Cisco Talos has changed drastically. I took on new roles, which is awesome and exciting, but in ...
Without going off the deep-end here and discussing every single Snort rule keyword, I just wanted to touch on a few modifiers that people so...
Let me start off by saying I'm not bashing the writer of this article, and I'm trying not to be super critical. I don't want to...
1. I don't feel like I have much to say. I do a tremendous amount of writing and blogging on the Snort, ClamAV, and Talos blogs. So...