<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: IPS signature update in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660292#M88143</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;check this bug-id:CSCeh86998&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:43:41 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>fmeetz</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2006-12-12T20:43:41Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>IPS signature update</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660291#M88142</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I would like to ask if cisco already resolved the issue that if an signature, major/minor update is applied to ids sensor the configuration of sensor is reset to its default value.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is happening to my ids4250 sensor.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 10 Mar 2019 10:21:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660291#M88142</guid>
      <dc:creator>koiflowerhorn</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-10T10:21:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPS signature update</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660292#M88143</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;check this bug-id:CSCeh86998&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:43:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660292#M88143</guid>
      <dc:creator>fmeetz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-12-12T20:43:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPS signature update</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660293#M88144</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The version of my sensor is 5.1(x). Is this version still affected by the BUG? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2007 00:57:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660293#M88144</guid>
      <dc:creator>koiflowerhorn</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-01-04T00:57:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPS signature update</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660294#M88145</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The bug-id referenced above is a 4.1 only bug and not related to 5.1.  It is possible that you are running into CSCsd33883 which is a loss of config on upgrade to 5.1(1).  We've only ever seen it happen on the IDSM2, but it is possible to happen on the appliances (i.e. there is no code specific to the IDSM2).  To the best of our knowledge and testing, you should not lose your tunings on service packs in the 5.1(x) train.  If you are experiencing this trouble, please open a TAC case and they will get the information to the Dev team.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:20:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660294#M88145</guid>
      <dc:creator>scothrel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-01-04T17:20:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IPS signature update</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660295#M88146</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are having an issue that if a signature update includes new fields to an engine our custom signatures lose all of their settings.  I'm not sure if this is what you are referring to.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2007 15:26:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ips-signature-update/m-p/660295#M88146</guid>
      <dc:creator>attmidsteam</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-01-10T15:26:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

