Re: patch to explain sendmail_ nasl

From: Vincent Renardias (vincentat_private)
Date: Thu Mar 06 2003 - 02:06:20 PST

  • Next message: Renaud Deraison: "Re: ipswitch IMail web interface"

    On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 10:58, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino wrote:
    > Michael Scheidell wrote:
    > > , this nasl is going to get patched several times, and while we
    > > are doing that, I hope that we can add this verbage to it (attached)
    > > 
    > > It explains that if you patch sendmail, or run this nasl against a patched
    > > sendmail, you will get a false positive.
    > 
    > Shouldn't we also link to the CERT advisory or the CERT's VU? It gives a 
    > detailed list of which vendors are vulnerable:
    > http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2003-07.html
    > http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/398025
    > 
    > Maybe we also need a script_vu_id()?
    
    In that case, I think we'd better add once and for all, a
    script_xref_id() function, and use :
    
    script_xref_id(src:"CVE", ref:"CVE-2002-1234");
    script_xref_id(src:"Bugtraq", ref:"6543");
    script_xref_id(src:"CERT", ref:"398025");
    script_xref_id(src:"Snort", ref:"1310");
    [...etc...]
    
    so that we can link to any kind of reference without having to add a new
    functions.
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 06 2003 - 02:08:12 PST