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 Web-App-Sec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PCI DSS Compliance

Subject: Re: PCI DSS Compliance
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 08:51:25 +0100

Syed Mohamed A wrote:
Exactly.... I agree with Bill .. This is not penetration test .. The
objective is to find ALL vulnerabilities inside ur environment.... This is
something "Die safe" kind of setup.. Even if your IDS, Firewall, IPS go
wrong... Your servers or application should stand safe...

And really how does identifying all known vulnerabilities alone make you safe? It's a scanner. It doesn't even verify for false positives and false negatives.


Shouldn't the entire security of an organization be taken into consideration? I mean to assume that on 1 day the IDS, Firewall, and IPS go belly-up and the rest of your network is still humming sounds like better odds than a day that maybe just your web server goes down. Additionally, there are stateful firewalls that even if you white-list the tester's IPs, there will still be implemented syn flood protection which you can't disable.

So do they also tell you that you have to run all your services on the expected, registered service ports too? Would I not be testable if my SSH is on port 33333? Why is my security dependent on my apps and services with possible vulnerabilities unverified by a scanner rather than the security and integrity of the system itself as a whole?

I disagree. This is not even a vulnerability test if conducted in this manner. It's a scam and it's mostly worthless. It follows the myth of patching to be safe and it appears the tester doesn't want to waste their time actually testing and verifying other than an automated scanner. Nice "take the money and run" business!

Sincerely,
-pete.

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