Hello Jan, Summary is supposed to indicate what the NVT is supposed to do while Name is for vulnerability title. I think having Summary helps in knowing what kind of verification NVT is going to do on the target system, which is very useful for someone to make a scanning decision.
If we aren't adding appropriate Summary, then we should start adding from now on I think. Thanks, Chandra. -----Original Message----- From: openvas-devel-boun...@wald.intevation.org [mailto:openvas-devel-boun...@wald.intevation.org] On Behalf Of Jan-Oliver Wagner Sent: 14 July 2011 13:32 To: openvas-devel@wald.intevation.org Subject: [Openvas-devel] Drop Summary-element from NVT meta info? Hello, looking at the summaries provided for each NVT, these information seem neither be very helpful nor used. Most NVTs simply copy the name to summary. Apparently the OpenVAS-Client uses the summary for the tooltips. I've not identified other places where they are used. So, how do people here feel about it? Should we drop it entirely? Benefit would be slightly smaller cache files, a little less memory footprint, etc. For the meantime, OTP could always copy name to summary to make OpenVAS-Client happy. Let me know what you think! Best Jan -- Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner | ++49-541-335084-0 | http://www.greenbone.net/ Greenbone Networks GmbH, Neuer Graben 17, 49074 Osnabrück | AG Osnabrück, HR B 202460 Geschäftsführer: Lukas Grunwald, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner _______________________________________________ Openvas-devel mailing list Openvas-devel@wald.intevation.org http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-devel _______________________________________________ Openvas-devel mailing list Openvas-devel@wald.intevation.org http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-devel
