Symantec intrusion prevention signatures not updating
Symantec intrusion prevention signatures not updating - Live free sexy text chat
From an organizations perspective, the benefits are: From a web application security consultant’s perspective, virtual patching opens up another avenue for providing services to your clients.Traditionally, if source code could not be updated for any of the reasons previously specified, there wasn’t much else a consultant could do to help.
As more and more businesses opt to outsource their application development, they are finding that executing vulnerability fixes would require an entirely new project.The resulting impact of virtual patch is that, while the actual source code of the application itself has not been modified, the exploitation attempt does not succeed.When you consider the numerous situations when organizations can’t simply immediately edit the source code, the value of virtual patching becomes apparent.For example, the Symantec Internet Threat Report  stated that the average time it took for organizations to patch their systems was 55 days, while the Whitehat Security Web Security Statistics Report  documented that their customers time-to-fix average was 138 days to remediate SQL Injection vulnerabilities found in their web applications.Now contrast this patching data with the fact that Symantec also reported that it only took an average of 6 days for exploit code to be released to the public and it becomes clear that traditional source code patching processes are not adequate.In addition the parser must be flexible as the environment protected as many headers and protocol elements are not used according to RFC requirements.
For example, while the RFC requires a single space between the method and the URI in the HTTP request line, Apache allows any sequence of whitespace between them.This document was initially developed as a collaborative outcome from the OWASP Global Summit 2011.The term virtual patching was originally coined by Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) vendors a number of years ago.In these situations, it is usually deemed that it is just too expensive to recode the application.An organization may be using a commercial application and the vendor has gone out of business, or they are using a version that is no longer supported by the vendor.In these situations, legacy application code can’t be patched.