All Apps and Add-ons

Has anyone compared using Splunk's netmon vs the Splunk App for Stream?

ss1210
New Member

Hi,

Has anyone compared the usage of the Splunk basic Netmon vs the Splunk App for Stream? I'm trying to get summary data from azure hosts. I am looking for something basic where we watch for the unexpected. So we would ignore inbound 80/443, but watch outbound random ports, etc....

It looks like the Stream App would be a pretty high volume of index data. I don't need the whole packets, just connection summary like what you would get from a cisco or firewall device.

Has anyone looked at both and can you offer advice on if stream would be overkill or maybe the filter language lets us get more specific to watching what we want?

Thank you!

Tags (1)
0 Karma
1 Solution

mdickey_splunk
Splunk Employee
Splunk Employee

Stream does not store packets (this is a very common misconception). Instead it generates events derived from the data contained in the packets. It has extensive capabilities for filtering, aggregation, etc. that limit and control the events it generates so that you don't have to store any more data than you want. If you're trying to get events into Splunk from wire data (or network traffic), Stream is (almost*) always the best way to do it.

*The only exceptions I can think of is when you already have another system in place generating the data you want, for example you only want NetFlow data (a small subset of what stream provides), and you already have a switch in place that generates this data for you. In this case (and assuming there is already an Splunk app available, as there is for NetFlow data), it may be easier to go that route versus using Stream.

View solution in original post

mdickey_splunk
Splunk Employee
Splunk Employee

Stream does not store packets (this is a very common misconception). Instead it generates events derived from the data contained in the packets. It has extensive capabilities for filtering, aggregation, etc. that limit and control the events it generates so that you don't have to store any more data than you want. If you're trying to get events into Splunk from wire data (or network traffic), Stream is (almost*) always the best way to do it.

*The only exceptions I can think of is when you already have another system in place generating the data you want, for example you only want NetFlow data (a small subset of what stream provides), and you already have a switch in place that generates this data for you. In this case (and assuming there is already an Splunk app available, as there is for NetFlow data), it may be easier to go that route versus using Stream.

ss1210
New Member

That's great, thank you!

0 Karma

piebob
Splunk Employee
Splunk Employee

please accept the answer if it worked for you. thanks!

0 Karma
Get Updates on the Splunk Community!

Stay Connected: Your Guide to May Tech Talks, Office Hours, and Webinars!

Take a look below to explore our upcoming Community Office Hours, Tech Talks, and Webinars this month. This ...

They're back! Join the SplunkTrust and MVP at .conf24

With our highly anticipated annual conference, .conf, comes the fez-wearers you can trust! The SplunkTrust, as ...

Enterprise Security Content Update (ESCU) | New Releases

Last month, the Splunk Threat Research Team had two releases of new security content via the Enterprise ...