Hmmm... I have been using Nessus since years now.. right from older
versions to 3.x both in windows and linux... I have tried different
set of configurations... and done a fair bit of tweaking... wrote few
NASL scripts and modified many based on target requirements...
The point is not about being able to use or not... it is about a
genuine issue in the vul. scanner that might be temporary ... and is
not limited to Nessus.. with due respect to Nessus it is widely used
and hence there are always more chances of people finding issues in
it... this kind of issue can happen with any Vul. scanner that is not
Nessus..
Regarding Christine's query, yes I understand what I mean by "all
possible exploits". My definition would be those that have maximum
chance of compromising a system and not doing something out of the
agreement..
Having said that, yes, there would be a whole set of issues where you
need to use your imagination, past experience and lateral thinking ...
but that's not where I'm coming from..
My question if I take an example is WHAT IF A VULNERABLE IIS RUNNING
ON TARGET WITH A VUNERABILITY DESCRIBED IN
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/18858/exploit GOES UNIDENTIFIED IN
NESSUS OR ANY OTHER SCANNER? Probability might be 1 out of 100 but
what to do if this happens?
On 7/29/07, Sol_Invictus <sol@haveyoubeentested.org> wrote:
Sounds to me like there's a lot of people that know how to run nessus but
don't know how to USE nessus properly.
That's all I have to say.
Sol.
-----Original Message-----
From: listbounce@securityfocus.com [mailto:listbounce@securityfocus.com] On
Behalf Of Steve Armstrong
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 4:04 PM
To: pen-test@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Cross testing exploit with vulnerability scan results
Chroot,
I believe you should always check and cross check your scans. Check for
false positives and ensure your scanning has been conducted in the
correct circumstances without some external factor injecting unknown
factors.
Also, remember that vulnerability scanning with an automated scanner is
using some one else's check sheet to check a system, so yes there could
be errors and problems with its code and implementation.
You should do you own checks too, otherwise what value are you adding to
the test? I personally would not scan someone's network and then
download the list of possible exploits of the web and run them against
the client system, not unless you have very understanding professional
indemnity insurers! You should obtain you code from good sites and
cross check where possible with dns records, md5, sha1, sha256 hashs and
other integrity assurance methods, else you may download 'bad code'.
Plan ahead and collect good code and exploits, some you will have to
modify yourself, but always check to see what it does on a test lan -
not the clients!
As to your example try running a manual banner grab or run another port
scanning tools (Scanrand or Unicom scanner for example).
And to start the flames as I leave, running a vulnerability scanner and
only exploiting or attacking what is says I what I would call a basic
vulnerability analysis - not a penetration test. A Penetration test
requires you to think out of the box and to try other stuff that many VA
tools just don't cover. And how would you penetration test a bespoke
program or application if your VA tool does not carry checks for it?
Running for cover . . . . .
Steve A
-----Original Message-----
From: listbounce@securityfocus.com [mailto:listbounce@securityfocus.com]
On Behalf Of Chroot
Sent: 27 July 2007 13:26
To: pen-test@securityfocus.com
Subject: Cross testing exploit with vulnerability scan results
Hi Fellow testers,
I've been conducting pen tests since 4 yrs now... the methodology I
follow is that we exploit or attempt to exploit ONLY those
vulnerabilities that a vulnerability scanner identifies. What if the
appropriate check or signature in the vulnerability scanner was not up
to date or had some coding issue or was not comprehensiveness enough
(or anything else) to identify a real existing vulnerability on a
system. This can result in serious false negatives. Would downloading,
installing and cross testing all available exploits for an identified
service be a good idea to minimize such a case? How many people have
faced such an issue or a similar issue? For me I faced this issue with
some bug in Nessus recently.
This is something like my NMAP says there is IIS6.0 running on port
443 of a target server. I do a Nessus scan on it and it doesn't report
anything. I then download all available exploits for IIS6.0 (or for
all version of IIS? would this make sense) from securityfocus.com or
securiteam.com or similar source and run it manually on the target
system.
Eagerly await opinions.
THNX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by: Cenzic
Need to secure your web apps NOW?
Cenzic finds more, "real" vulnerabilities fast.
Click to try it, buy it or download a solution FREE today!
http://www.cenzic.com/downloads
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by: Cenzic
Need to secure your web apps NOW?
Cenzic finds more, "real" vulnerabilities fast.
Click to try it, buy it or download a solution FREE today!
http://www.cenzic.com/downloads
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by: Cenzic
Need to secure your web apps NOW?
Cenzic finds more, "real" vulnerabilities fast.
Click to try it, buy it or download a solution FREE today!
http://www.cenzic.com/downloads
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by: Cenzic
Need to secure your web apps NOW?
Cenzic finds more, "real" vulnerabilities fast.
Click to try it, buy it or download a solution FREE today!
http://www.cenzic.com/downloads
------------------------------------------------------------------------
