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.




Network Security Pen-Test
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: vulnerability scanners not effective? or just a false-positive?

Subject: Re: vulnerability scanners not effective? or just a false-positive?
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 09:31:27 -0600
On 3/29/06, Joel Jose <joeljose420@bonbon.net> wrote:
But i think it is a very "huge" vulnerability. and nessus didnt
even give a hinch!!

Well, Nessus is primarily focused on operating system vulnerabilities
and problems with common services. I'm not sure how you're "accessing"
the directories -- if it's via Windows sharing, you have multiple
problems here that should be addressed immediately. If it's via some
web application, then it's not surprising Nessus didn't pick it up,
though you still have things the client should fix.

and one more quest. How many of you think that the existance of the default
banners in services(eg apache default error pages) are a security threat, if
not high, atleast medium?. I do.

First of all, such existence is a *vulnerability*, not a *threat*.
Lots of people frequently misuse these terms and we should be clear in
our terminology. Second, the proper way to do this is to define
criteria for each severity level. For example you might say that
"high" vulnerabilities allow code execution or access to restricted
data, "medium" vulnerabilities violate best practices but don't
necessarily allow code execution or data loss, and "low"
vulnerabilities provide configuration information that shouldn't be
disclosed but isn't a protected secret like a password. Those criteria
should typically be more specific and take into account the overall
risk environment of the client organization (industry, company policy,
etc.)

But in the general sense... I never classify default banners as a high
vulnerability as it seems kind of "Chicken Little" to me. I recommend
they be turned off (or changed to something else if the client is a
little twisted) but it would be incorrect to give your client a false
impression of the risk stemming from that decision.

--
Kyle Maxwell
http://caffeinatedsecurity.com
[krmaxwell@gmail.com]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Cenzic

Concerned about Web Application Security? 
As attacks through web applications continue to rise, you need to proactively 
protect your applications from hackers. Cenzic has the most comprehensive 
solutions to meet your application security penetration testing and 
vulnerability management needs. You have an option to go with a managed 
service (Cenzic ClickToSecure) or an enterprise software (Cenzic Hailstorm). 
Download FREE whitepaper on how a managed service can help you: 
http://www.cenzic.com/forms/ec.php?pubid=10025
And, now for a limited time we can do a FREE audit for you to confirm your 
results from other product. Contact us at request@cenzic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>