At 1:37 +0000 26/2/2004, H D Moore wrote: > I consider these two separate vulnerabilities. The reason is that blank > passwords are normally the result of a default configuration or insecure > application install (many apps bundle a wide-open MSDE service), where a > common or weak account password is a admin/developer training issue. I would have thought the vulnerability is the same - an easily guessable password. However, the reason for the vulnerability may be the result of different actions. Although the name of the script is mssql_brute_force.nasl it only check 11 different combinations of username and password. It isn't really a brute force attempt at guessing the password. > Maybe move the login routines into a mssql_funcs.inc and have each plugin > include it? Combining them into one plugin would work, provided the > report differentiates between blank and weak passwords. mssql_brute_force.nasl already reports the username and password. The only addition would be an explanation that a blank password is likely to be the result of a default install. > On Wednesday 25 February 2004 18:14, Dennis Jackson wrote: > > Should the two scripts mssql_blank_password.nasl and > > mssql_brute_force.nasl be merged into one? > > > > The first script simply tests for the combination of > > username "sa" password "". While the second scripts tests > > for eleven different combinations of username and > > password. It would be trivial to add "sa" / "" into the > > list in mssql_brute_force.nasl > > > > As a further change, some of the description in > > mssql_blank_password.nasl should be added into the report > > produced by mssql_brute_force.nasl > > > > > > Dennis. _______________________________________________ Plugins-writers mailing list Plugins-writers@private http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/plugins-writers
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Feb 26 2004 - 13:48:15 PST