lately i've been hammered badly by this signature. the funny thing is the destination ports are highports ,etc 1025,5000,etc (non netbios) . i noticed this signature has been firing frequently since ms08-067. anyone having the same experience ? is this a true positive?
If you are referring to sig 3327 subsig 8, it doesn't have any event-action associated with it by default. By any chance, have you tuned the sig or added an Event Action Override that might be applied to it?
Signature 3327-8 is a meta component and thus only part of a signature. It does not have any event actions by default as the main signature is the one that'll produce an alert once the required components have been triggered by an attack.
A component going off may not be of significance, which is why they are set not not produce alert by default. If you've changed this setting, and are now annoyed by the alerts, I suggest turning it back to default.
This signature is relevant to cve-2003-0352, which is the vulnerability the Blaster worm abused. I'm sure there's still a bunch of old machines out there infected by this worm and scanning the Internet for victims.
Table of ContentsIntroductionVersion HistoryPossible Future
UpdatesDocuments PurposeNAT Operation in ASA 8.3+ SectionsRule Types
Network Object NATTwice NAT / Manual NATRule Types used per SectionNAT
Types used with Twice NAT / Manual NAT and Network Obje...
Table of Contents Introduction:This document describes details on how
NAT-T works. Background: ESP encrypts all critical information,
encapsulating the entire inner TCP/UDP datagram within an ESP header.
ESP is an IP protocol in the same sense that TCP an...