Re: netstat scanner

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Michel Arboi wrote:

> On Tue Aug 17 2004 at 13:04, Hemsley, Trevor wrote:
>
> > But presumably suffers from the disadvantage that if a machine is
> > compromised and netstat is replaced in order to hide trojan ports then
> > that will not be detected...
>
> Nothing is perfect. It depends what you are looking for.
> If you have to  audit a very sensitive production machine, I'd suggest
> that you use this rather than classical port scanners.

Any test should be done from the site where one may find the bad guys.

If your scan kills anything then you have a problem and the problem is NOT
called nessus. It is the machine that is not resilient enough and not
shielded enough that is your problem.

Hugo.

-- 
 All email sent to me is bound to the rules described on my homepage.
    hvdkooij@vanderkooij.org            http://hvdkooij.xs4all.nl/
            Don't meddle in the affairs of sysadmins,
            for they are subtle and quick to anger.
_______________________________________________
Nessus mailing list
Nessus@list.nessus.org
http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus