RE: [Full-Disclosure] Top 15 Reasons Why Admins Use Security Scan ners
From: Ron DuFresne (dufresne_at_winternet.com)
To: "Starford, Christopher D." <CHRISTOPHER.D.STARFORD@saic.com> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:48:01 -0500 (CDT)
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Starford, Christopher D. wrote:
> I believe many true IT Security Auditors out there would agree that your
> wrong on this one.
Yet, audits in the corp env's tend to focus not on IT nor security, but
bean-counting. I've seen as HYarlan mentions that the vast majority of
auditors have been of the finnancial category, and clueless about IT and
it's processes and such. Now, this is not the auditors fault, but
managments, as well as that of the partnering companies that make the
request and hire in the wrong folks.
Of course then there are the snack-oil IT folks, those that pentest and
such with a point and click tool and canned report. A thourough IT sec
audiit requires that the audirot become familiar with the org being
audited and actually look into system configs. There are many issues in
how systems are confuifugered that a point and launch tool are not going
to uncover and a canned report will not mention.
"Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity. It
eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart
***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***
OK, so you're a Ph.D. Just don't touch anything.
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.