Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | plugin 22194 - potential false positive? |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 15 Sep 2006 22:01:44 -0400 |
I have been running some scans that include plugin 22194 (network check for server service bo/ms06-040). Did some limited testing under various circumstances and the plugin seems to detect presence for the vulnerability accurately.
However, I have heard very recently from a server administrator group, that they suspect potential false positives. Their claim is that the patches have been applied, servers rebooted, even before their devices were scanned. From my part, I have some homework to do with them i.e. really verify that indeed, the patch for KB921883 was applied and took effect.
Nonetheless, I would like to reach out to the list to seek out if anybody has had any observations of false positives with respect to this plugin. I do realize that sometimes the best way to check for such vulnerabilities is with more privileged access. However, given the nature of this specific vulnerability, I am confident in an effective network check.
1. What could possibly cause a false positive with such a check? 2. What is the plugin actually doing? (high level gist: it calls a named pipe relating to the server service, initializes a buffer, populates it with 'nessus', then trying to overflow the buffer; if patch is applied the buffer should return 0; if not, the buffer returns 'nessus' - thereby checking for the vulnerability) Can someone confirm my understanding?
Any help or feedback provided is greatly appreciated.
_______________________________________________ Nessus mailing list Nessus@list.nessus.org http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Nessus 3.0.3 scan abends Btcpcom.nlm, Joel Elwell |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: plugin 22194 - potential false positive?, Nicolas Pouvesle |
| Previous by Thread: | Nessus 3.0.3 scan abends Btcpcom.nlm, Joel Elwell |
| Next by Thread: | Re: plugin 22194 - potential false positive?, Nicolas Pouvesle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |