> Maybe I'm missing something... If so, I'll step back and continue my > lurking and learning from your valuable experiences. > > I would rather have Nessus test for the underlying vulnerability that the > patches are supposed to resolve, rather than test for the existence of the > patch itself. The debate raging on concerning the methodology of the > dedicated applictions (Hfnetchk, MBSA, UpdateExpert, et al) and their > effectiveness is a good one. But to me, it's more of a change management > issue than a vulnerability issue. I'd be willing to let Shavlik, MS and > the others to work out that issue and work on it from the internal view.
well, in conjuncitn wiht the safe_checks() options, someone could add tests, (based on attack signatures and hacker scripts) -- Michael Scheidell SECNAP Network Security, LLC (561) 368-9561 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.secnap.net/
