Re: opinions on Vigliante's SecureScanNX for attack/pen work?
From: Zen (zen@kill-9.it)Date: 11/30/01
- Previous message: Kostas Evangelinos: "Re: Brute force .htpasswd"
- In reply to: John Lampe: "Re: opinions on Vigliante's SecureScanNX for attack/pen work?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 11:10:58 +0100 From: Zen <zen@kill-9.it> To: John Lampe <j_lampe@bellsouth.net> Subject: Re: opinions on Vigliante's SecureScanNX for attack/pen work? Message-ID: <20011130111058.L2737@inferno.dsnet.it>
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:25:16PM -0000, John Lampe wrote:
> > - it's not the fastest on earth (manually supervised,
> > but it will change in the future)
>
> Really? IMO, securescanx scanned a little too fast. I ran a scan against a
> /24 range of addresses off of a T-1 connection with both Nessus and
> vigilante whilst running a packet sniffer off of the spanned default gw
> port....The vigilante was so aggressive that it missed many of the ports
I wasn't referring to the packet-rate speed, but to the <start
the test>-<get the report> cycle.
As automated test results are manually reviewed, it could take
24/48 hours to be able to get the report after the scan has
finished.
bye,
-- 'Why do you close your eyes?' 'So that the room will be empty.' zen@kill-9.it . Geek . And proud of it . http://www.kill-9.it/jargon/html/entry/zen.html---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus Security Intelligence Alert (SIA) Service. For more information on SecurityFocus' SIA service which automatically alerts you to the latest security vulnerabilities please see: https://alerts.securityfocus.com/
- Previous message: Kostas Evangelinos: "Re: Brute force .htpasswd"
- In reply to: John Lampe: "Re: opinions on Vigliante's SecureScanNX for attack/pen work?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
