(jumping in with a blatant ad)
Try Seccubus! https://www.seccubus.com/

It specifically designed to handle vulnerability state changes over time.

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Joris <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Tatooin,
>
> Thanks for the detailed information, I will test it out. No comments yet :)
>
> best regards
> joris
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 9:58 PM, tatooin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Joris,
>>
>> No comments on this ?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On Fri, 2017-12-08 at 22:00 +0100, tatooin wrote:
>>
>> Hi Joris,
>>
>> I face the same challenge than you do; as my stakeholders regularly ask
>> me for delta reports which can highlight the efforts made to solve
>> vulnerabilities. People will simply stop fixing vulnerabilities if the work
>> done to solve previous ones is not recognized.
>> So I completely agree with your statement below.
>>
>> Alas, it seems out of interest of OpenVAS developers. I have raised this
>> topic on this mailing list already, and never received any positive answers.
>>
>> I tried the official way to report delta (because officially, yes, this
>> is suppose to work ! Look at command "*get_reports*", you have the
>> arguments @*delta_report_id *and @*delta_states)*
>>
>> Typically, If I do the following command to get the deltas in a csv file:
>>
>> *omp -h 127.0.0.1 -u admin -w xxx -iX '<get_reports
>> report_id="MyLastReportID" levels="hm"
>> format_id="c1645568-627a-11e3-a660-406186ea4fc5"
>> delta_report_id="MySecondLastReportID" delta_states="cgns" />' | xmlstarlet
>> sel -t -v get_reports_response/report/text\(\) | base64 -i -d >
>> deltareport.csv*
>>
>> Then my deltareport.csv won't highlight any delta. Do the same with
>> format_id=1a60a67e-97d0-4cbf-bc77-f71b08e7043d (PDF) you'll get the
>> deltas you are looking at.
>>
>> But obviously, when you are doing vulnerability management programs on a
>> somewhat large scale, PDF reporting is completely useless....
>>
>> So in a nutshell; it is suppose to work but it doesn't. :-(
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 10:12 +0100, Joris wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Thijs!
>>
>> You made me think about past results and not having to care about it: It
>> is true that the tickets will be only generated on current results. On the
>> other hand, does that mean that you create multiple tickets for the same
>> issue if it appears in 2 consecutive scans?
>>
>> We're interested in differential for 2 other reasons:i Jori
>> - from a security culture perspective, it would be interesting to report
>> on reduction on vulnerabilities and create some noise about who is doing
>> well and who is not.
>> - some systems will have issues which cannot be remediated per se. By
>> differential reporting, we can look at new stuff and the report would not
>> be cluttered by old stuff we already knew about / ticketed.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Joris
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Thijs Stuurman <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> You can schedule the scans to repeat them.
>>
>>
>>
>> Personally I wasn’t happy with the built in scheduler and automated one
>> myself using python talking to the gvm-tools API.
>>
>> (https://github.com/Thijssss/openvas_scheduler which might help you
>> automate things yourself, gvm-tools also has example scripts:
>> https://bitbucket.org/greenbone/gvm-tools)
>>
>>
>>
>> I am not going for differences really; any finding with a CVSS score of >
>> 4 will trigger an alert which sends an email to our ticketing system.
>>
>> Once a month I start my scheduler which will start any job that hasn’t
>> run for 3 weeks or so. (I could leave it running in a screen forever but I
>> still supervise and time it all, when it is not running I got time to
>> update scan systems)
>>
>>
>>
>> If you go to tasks and click on the Reports > Total number you can see an
>> overview of all the reports and quickly see if things improved or not.
>>
>> There is a compare button (underneath Actions, next to ‘delete’ so be
>> careful), click on two and you’ll get a comparison overview.
>>
>>
>>
>> Still, why care about past results; it’s the latest scan result that
>> counts in my book.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thijs Stuurman
>>
>> Security Operations Center | KPN Internedservices B.V.
>>
>> [email protected] | [email protected]
>>
>> T: +31(0)299476185 <+31%20299%20476%20185> | M: +31(0)624366778
>> <+31%206%2024366778>
>>
>> PGP Key-ID: 0x16ADC048 (https://pgp.surfnet.nl/)
>>
>> Fingerprint: 2EDB 9B42 D6E8 7D4B 6E02 8BE5 6D46 8007 16AD C048
>>
>>
>>
>> W: https://www.internedservices.nl | L: https://nl.linkedin.com/in/thi
>> jsstuurman
>>
>>
>>
>> *Van:* Openvas-discuss [mailto:openvas-discuss-bounce
>> [email protected]] *Namens *Joris
>> *Verzonden:* donderdag 7 december 2017 09:51
>> *Aan:* [email protected]
>> *Onderwerp:* [Openvas-discuss] Reporting on delta's between scans on
>> same host
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello list,
>>
>>
>>
>> Using the scanner here and are pretty impressed with the results and the
>> web GUI.
>>
>>
>>
>> Our next move is basically to identify differences between consecutive
>> scans on hosts (was a vulnerability patched? was a new vulnerability
>> introduced on the system?)
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on my understanding, the system does not support this natively but
>> I can be wrong. How do others solve this issue? Do you build automation
>> around it ?
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Joris
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openvas-discuss mailing 
>> [email protected]https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openvas-discuss mailing 
>> [email protected]https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openvas-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
Openvas-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss

Reply via email to