Re: Solaris Local Security Checks

On Feb 1, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Zate Berg wrote:

> sorry to reply to my own message but I have found a little more info.
>
> in solaris.inc we have the following :
>
> function solaris_check_patch(release, arch, patch, package,  
> obsoleted_by)
>
> notice package, then obsoleted_by.
>
> In the nasl for solaris9_110938.nasl there is :
> e =  solaris_check_patch(release:"5.9", arch:"sparc",  
> patch:"110938-22", obsoleted_by:"", package:"SUNWed SUNWedag  
> SUNWedagx SUNWedcom SUNWesae SUNWesaem SUNWesagt SUNWesamn  
> SUNWesasc SUNWescaa SUNWescam SUNWescix SUNWescli SUNWesclt  
> SUNWescom SUNWescon SUNWesdb SUNWesjp SUNWesjrm SUNWesmcp SUNWesmod  
> SUNWesmsg SUNWesora SUNWessa SUNWessdk SUNWessmn SUNWessrv  
> SUNWessta SUNWessts SUNWessvc SUNWesweb SUNWeswga SUNWeswgs  
> SUNWmeta SUNWsycfd");
>
> basically it has obsoleted_by , then package.
>
> This would be a problem right ?  Or am I looking in the wrong areas ?

No, it would not be the cause of the problem -- the order of the  
arguments do not matter.

We're investigating this particular issue and will come back to you  
shortly.


                            -- Renaud
_______________________________________________
Nessus mailing list
Nessus@list.nessus.org
http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus