Dailydave mailing list archives
Re: Drinking the Cool-aid
From: "Eggensperger, Roy E" <Roy.Eggensperger () VerizonWireless com>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 11:47:23 -0500
Authenticated scanners are a bad practice (imho)
Can you expand on this a bit more? I would be interested to hear your opinion as to why you say this. I think using authenticated scanners is an excellent way to identify: 1. Computers missed by the patch management process. 2. Effectiveness of patch management process. I've seen patch products report to the console that a host is patched; however, the scan proved that a given patch failed to apply. 3. Client software not managed and patched by IT (i.e., iTunes) 4. Mis configurations (i.e., Autorun, no SEHOP, no DEP, etc.). Joe Gatt @gattjoe **********Lots and Lots of OS Updates and vulnerabilities that cant be seen from outside the box, is the risk of flinging around usernames and passwords on the network higher than the risk of not being aware of a vulnerability? I dunno.....I lean towards no personally ________________________________
_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunityinc com https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
Current thread:
- Drinking the Cool-aid Dave Aitel (Feb 22)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid yersinia (Feb 24)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid Alfonso De Gregorio (Feb 24)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid dan (Mar 21)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid Scharf, Stephen (Mar 24)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid dan (Mar 24)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid dan (Mar 21)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid Andreas Lindh (Mar 03)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid Joe Gatt (Mar 03)
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid Andre Gironda (Mar 03)
- Message not available
- Re: Drinking the Cool-aid Eggensperger, Roy E (Mar 03)