2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnca.2009.07.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance evaluation comparison of Snort NIDS under Linux and Windows Server

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An open-source "Snort"-based NIDS, i.e., S-NIDS, has recently emerged as a solution to protect the networks from various possible intrusions and attacks [10,12,18,21,22]. Snort uses a number of pattern matching algorithms such as Aho-Corasick, modified Wu-Manber and low memory key-word trie (lowmem) [23].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…An open-source "Snort"-based NIDS, i.e., S-NIDS, has recently emerged as a solution to protect the networks from various possible intrusions and attacks [10,12,18,21,22]. Snort uses a number of pattern matching algorithms such as Aho-Corasick, modified Wu-Manber and low memory key-word trie (lowmem) [23].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Snort uses a number of pattern matching algorithms such as Aho-Corasick, modified Wu-Manber and low memory key-word trie (lowmem) [23]. However, the most important and well-known fact is that the S-NIDS drops packets significantly when dealing with either a large amount of traffic, high speed or large packet size [12][13][14]18].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations