Quality of Service (QoS) Comparison Analysis of Snort IDS and Bro IDS Application in Software Define Network (SDN) Architecture

H. Hendrawan, Parman Sukarno, M. A. Nugroho
{"title":"Quality of Service (QoS) Comparison Analysis of Snort IDS and Bro IDS Application in Software Define Network (SDN) Architecture","authors":"H. Hendrawan, Parman Sukarno, M. A. Nugroho","doi":"10.1109/ICoICT.2019.8835211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Intrusion Detection system (IDS) was an application which was aimed to monitor network activity or system and it could find if there was a dangerous operation. Implementation of IDS on Software Define Network architecture (SDN) has drawbacks. IDS on SDN architecture might decreasing network Quality of Service (QoS). So the network could not provide services to the existing network traffic. Throughput, delay and packet loss were important parameters of QoS measurement. Snort IDS and bro IDS were tools in the application of IDS on the network. Both had differences, one of which was found in the detection method. Snort IDS used a signature based detection method while bro IDS used an anomaly based detection method. The difference between them had effects in handling the network traffic through it. In this research, we compared both tools. This comparison are done with testing parameters such as throughput, delay, packet loss, CPU usage, and memory usage. From this test, it was found that bro outperform snort IDS for throughput, delay , and packet loss parameters. However, CPU usage and memory usage on bro requires higher resource than snort.","PeriodicalId":439440,"journal":{"name":"2019 7th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT)","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 7th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICoICT.2019.8835211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Intrusion Detection system (IDS) was an application which was aimed to monitor network activity or system and it could find if there was a dangerous operation. Implementation of IDS on Software Define Network architecture (SDN) has drawbacks. IDS on SDN architecture might decreasing network Quality of Service (QoS). So the network could not provide services to the existing network traffic. Throughput, delay and packet loss were important parameters of QoS measurement. Snort IDS and bro IDS were tools in the application of IDS on the network. Both had differences, one of which was found in the detection method. Snort IDS used a signature based detection method while bro IDS used an anomaly based detection method. The difference between them had effects in handling the network traffic through it. In this research, we compared both tools. This comparison are done with testing parameters such as throughput, delay, packet loss, CPU usage, and memory usage. From this test, it was found that bro outperform snort IDS for throughput, delay , and packet loss parameters. However, CPU usage and memory usage on bro requires higher resource than snort.
Snort IDS和Bro IDS在软件定义网络(SDN)体系结构中应用的服务质量(QoS)比较分析
入侵检测系统(IDS)是一种旨在监视网络活动或系统并发现是否存在危险操作的应用程序。在软件定义网络体系结构(SDN)上实现入侵检测存在缺陷。SDN架构下的IDS可能会降低网络服务质量(QoS)。因此网络无法向现有的网络流量提供服务。吞吐量、延迟和丢包是QoS测量的重要参数。Snort IDS和bro IDS是IDS在网络上应用的工具。两者都有差异,其中一个是在检测方法上发现的。Snort IDS使用基于签名的检测方法,而bro IDS使用基于异常的检测方法。它们之间的差异对处理通过它的网络流量有影响。在这项研究中,我们比较了这两种工具。这种比较是通过吞吐量、延迟、数据包丢失、CPU使用和内存使用等测试参数完成的。从这个测试中可以发现,在吞吐量、延迟和包丢失参数方面,bro优于snort IDS。但是,bro上的CPU使用和内存使用比snort需要更多的资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书