Re: opinions on Vigliante's SecureScanNX for attack/pen work?

[Zen <zen () kill-9 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/