Penetration Testing mailing list archives
RE: Vulnerability scanners
From: "Rapaille Max" <Max.Rapaille () nbb be>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 08:54:48 +0100
Totally agree, but Qualys allows you to download the result from their Datacenter (in Html or XML format) and so you delete the report from their servers.. At this time you just loose the comparison features, and have to do it yourself. But anyway, it has to stay on their network a certain amont of time... I know they had a project to make an internal report server, avoiding to send data to their servers.. They didn't achived the project, but I think the API's are available... Cheers Max -----Original Message----- From: Michael Welch [mailto:mdwelch () sendsecure com] Sent: vendredi 28 mars 2003 00:46 To: Paris Stone; Alex Russell; Jeff Williams @ Aspect; Dan Lynch; pen-test () securityfocus com Subject: RE: Vulnerability scanners About 4 months ago I performed a comparison of Qualys, Foundscan, and Vigilante. They all have there good and bad point's. The nice things about Qualys was that all you had to do is plug the appliance into your network and you were ready to go. My concern was that although your scan data was transferred via https it was stored on another companies network. Being a security professional I have a hard time allowing my internal network scanning results sitting on another's network. -----Original Message----- From: Paris Stone [mailto:paris () ciscoinstructor net] Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 5:25 PM To: Alex Russell; Jeff Williams @ Aspect; Dan Lynch; pen-test () securityfocus com Subject: Re: Vulnerability scanners The Qualys box is an appliance that is configured once. It connects out your firewall using SSL (TCP 443) to hit Qualys's web/scanner server. It then retrieves the information(database of exloits, etc...) and runs them against your internal network. It then uploads the info to their database servers using SSL. Then all of your information is available via the web with nice reporting, pretty graphics, etc... It breaks it down into reports for techies and reports for non-techies (CxO's) daily, weekly, monthly. The economies thing is simply that you have a yearly subscription based upon number of hosts scanned. A fixed cost, 24x7x365 tool that doesn't have HR or benefit issues and doesn't get kids sick and have to take days off. It IS easy to setup and administration is easy for those who can RTFM. Alex Russell (alex () netWindows org) wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 27 March 2003 12:58 pm, Jeff Williams @ Aspect wrote:Let's assume that you're talking about 256 IPs (based on Qualys' published pricing), and you want to scan weekly. That's at least a day a week of effort for someone (probably more to generate a very nice report and summaries). The cost of a full-time sysadmin (including salary, benefits, office, etc...) probably costs well north of $100K. You'd have to include some equipment costs in there. So I doubt you could do it much cheaper. I think vulnerability scanning is a reasonable thing to outsource for companies that are not in the security or networking field already.This sounds like a false economy to me. First: how does the Qualis box remove the need for a sysadmin? It's just
one
more appliance to manage, and something your existing admin should be able to do anyway. And if you already didn't have an admin, you'd need one now that you're thinking in terms of security. No extra cost here (aside from incremental admin time). Secondly: if you've got a trained monkey doing your report generation, then you're right about the costs. If, however, you have a developer automate most of that, then you can add more nodes to be scanned at much lower incremental cost (change a config file). Additionally, using public signature sets may have downsides, but using Open Source tools is good both for your own internal flexiblity and for the world at large (checks aren't quite right? set that developer to work writing and contributing back better ones!). All in all, your initial costs to do it in house with smart people and Open Source tools might be higher, but your incremental costs do not grow at nearly the same rate. OTOH, if you don't have any admins or developers, then Qualys might look like a very nice option. HTH - -- Alex Russell alex () netWindows org alex () SecurePipe com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+g3J/oV0dQ6uSmkYRAvN6AJ44Qwzu3sSypJkLDRbl1W1ZjrrnswCZASf0 m88qoVsnBJR2vt7vXZaYyKc= =kMak -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- top spam and e-mail risk at the gateway. SurfControl E-mail Filter puts the brakes on spam & viruses and gives you the reports to prove it. See exactly how much junk never even makes it in the door. Free 30-day trial: http://www.surfcontrol.com/go/zsfptl1
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Paris Stone CISSP, CCNP, CNE/CNI, MCSE/MCT, Master CIW Administrator, CIW Security Analyst, NSA A+, Network+, iNet+ http://www.ciscoinstructor.net/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The rich man is not the one with the most, but the one who needs the least" top spam and e-mail risk at the gateway. SurfControl E-mail Filter puts the brakes on spam & viruses and gives you the reports to prove it. See exactly how much junk never even makes it in the door. Free 30-day trial: http://www.surfcontrol.com/go/zsfptl1 top spam and e-mail risk at the gateway. SurfControl E-mail Filter puts the brakes on spam & viruses and gives you the reports to prove it. See exactly how much junk never even makes it in the door. Free 30-day trial: http://www.surfcontrol.com/go/zsfptl1 top spam and e-mail risk at the gateway. SurfControl E-mail Filter puts the brakes on spam & viruses and gives you the reports to prove it. See exactly how much junk never even makes it in the door. Free 30-day trial: http://www.surfcontrol.com/go/zsfptl1
Current thread:
- Re: Vulnerability scanners, (continued)
- Re: Vulnerability scanners Chris Sharp (Mar 27)
- Re: Vulnerability scanners R. DuFresne (Mar 27)
- Re: Vulnerability scanners Paris Stone (Mar 27)
- RE: Vulnerability scanners Michael Welch (Mar 27)
- RE: Vulnerability scanners Derrick Johnson (Mar 28)
- Re: Vulnerability scanners Roman Medina (Mar 28)
- RE: Vulnerability scanners David Nester (Mar 28)
- RE: Vulnerability scanners Michael Welch (Mar 27)
- Re: Vulnerability scanners Chris Sharp (Mar 27)