RE: Command Line RPC vulnerability scanner?

From: Stong, Ian C. (Contractor) (StongI_at_ncr.disa.mil)
Date: 08/01/03

  • Next message: Paul Tinsley: "RE: Command Line RPC vulnerability scanner?"
    To: 'Russell Fulton' <r.fulton@auckland.ac.nz>, "Schmehl, Paul L" <pauls@utdallas.edu>
    Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 07:32:51 -0400 
    
    

    Hi Russell,

    A possible workaround (depending on your WAN requirements for port 135) for
    the systems that can't be patched is to simply block port 135 into your
    network. If you need port 135 to be accessible from certain remote sites
    then allow those specific source/destination address and port pairs through
    your router or firewall.

    Just a thought,

    Ian Stong

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Russell Fulton [mailto:r.fulton@auckland.ac.nz]
    Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 4:26 PM
    To: Schmehl, Paul L
    Cc: incidents@securityfocus.com
    Subject: RE: Command Line RPC vulnerability scanner?

    On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 03:30, Schmehl, Paul L wrote:
    > I have both eEye's tool and ISS's tool. I decided to run the ISS
    > commandline scanner on our entire class B last night. That way I could
    > come in this morning and have a complete report of patch compliance. Or
    > so I thought. When I got in to my office this morning, the ISS tool had
    > been running for 15 hours and had reported on a total of 99 hosts.

    I ran it on our class B a couple of days ago and after about 5 hours it
    stopped scanning after finding 7500 hosts listening on port 135. The
    process did not terminate it just hung with no more output being written
    to stdout. The output file had a truncated line at the end suggesting
    that the buffer had not been fully written.

    The number of host is close to what I would expect so I'm going to try
    again today.

    Another feature of this scanner is that it scans in random order so if
    anything goes wrong you can't simply restart from where you left off :(
    I don't know why ISS decided to do this rather than a simple sequential
    scan.

    As others have mentioned the scanner does two tests and returns one of 4
    results for each: [VULN], [ptch], [....] and [ ? ? ].

    THe meaning of the first two are obvious but the others are not
    specified and I would like to have more information of exactly what they
    mean. Anyone worked it out?

    We have found some systems that are proving very difficult to patch - we
    can't get them to the requisite SP levels because of lack of disk space
    or other issues. Does anyone know of safe workarounds for such systems?
     

    -- 
    Russell Fulton, Network Security Officer, The University of Auckland,
    New Zealand.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    

  • Next message: Paul Tinsley: "RE: Command Line RPC vulnerability scanner?"

    Relevant Pages

    • RE: SSH connection attempts in logs.
      ... I would suggest the OP look into something like denyhosts or sshdblock. ... SSH connection attempts in logs. ... firewall a specific port. ... It's some kind of port scanner very likely. ...
      (Security-Basics)
    • Re: Changing from MS
      ... Go to Packman and download the latest Sane and Xsane ... and especially LIBIEEE1284 library (if it runs off the parallel port). ... You cannot use the YAST hardware scanner to set it up. ... Linux is progressing at an even faster rate than Windows is, ...
      (alt.os.linux.suse)
    • Re: SSH connection attempts in logs.
      ... Why would you need a secure shell if you didn't care who was connecting to your boxen? ... What I typically do to circumvent the default for scanners and similar ilk is to just change the port that ssh is on or to forward from the firewall a specific port. ... I have also seen mention of 'knock' style programs but have not had the spare time to implement a working 'knock' setup. ... It's some kind of port scanner very likely. ...
      (Security-Basics)
    • Re: Multifunction Printer
      ... Shut off all peripherals like the printer, speakers, ... functioning properly, many times, I also bought a new USB cable so that I ... > USB Local Port Canon MPC 200 Printer. ... Scanner may be turned off, ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
    • Re: Security of Port 3389
      ... port and there is only 64k ports in total. ... run your cable modem to a router, close every port at the router, only open ... scanner running on them. ... checking for security updates once a week also. ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.work_remotely)