|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
From: Slighter, Tim (tslighter
itc.nrcs.usda.gov)Date: Tue Jun 25 2002 - 14:02:52 CDT
TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsubscribe issforum" in the body of your message to
majordomo
iss.net Contact issforum-owner
iss.net for help with any problems!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I experienced similar results. The scan caught most anything that was
currently running 1.3.24 but not patched but missed anything from an earlier
version...including 1.3.19 and down. I attemtped to compare finding by
using the Eeye Apache Chunked Scanning tool:
http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Tools/RetinaApacheChunked.exe
and by using nessus. Results came up with Eeye tool finding everything that
did have Apache of any version and NOT patched, IIS finding only 1.3.24
Apache systems and not 100% accurate. Nessus, found nothing at all.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Ozdowski [mailto:dto2c
virginia.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 8:40 AM
To: issforum
iss.net
Subject: Internet Scanner Apache Check
TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsubscribe issforum" in the body of your message to
majordomo
iss.net Contact issforum-owner
iss.net for help with any
problems!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've been using the Internet Scanner 6.21 with the most current Update
package installed.
I prepared a scan to check JUST for the recent Apache vulnerability and
ran some tests on our local network to see what it came up with, and the
results were fairly atrocious. It came up with a very significant
numebr of boxes that were already upgraded, and also missed a fair
number that I have confirmation (from local admins) are NOT upgraded.
What has everyone else's performance been with this particular check?
Some things I noticed:
1) All false positives were on machines running 1.3.26 . No box
upgraded to 2.0.39 showed as still vulnerable.
2) It missed machines running VERY old Apache distributions. (Like
1.3.10 and 1.13.11)
3) It missed OSX versions of Apache, which I understand has also been
declared (or at least suspected) as vulnerable.
I would appreciate any input on this subject.
Many thanks,
Dan Ozdowski
University of Virginia
Network Systems
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]