Re: OpenSSL 0.9.7a seems to be vulnerable (was: Re: LKM Trojan)

[Ow Mun Heng <Ow Mun Heng wdc com>]

On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 10:21, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> Am Mi, den 01.12.2004 schrieb Rahul Sundaram um 2:15:
> 
> > > Its a false positive. Lame tools just checking for application version
> > > numbers bring lame results. 
> 
> > whats the alternative?
> 
> > Rahul Sundaram
> 
> Good question - next one ;) Seriously, from my observation such tools
> alerting based on version numbers (nessus is such a application too)
> make unexperienced users uncertain. 
I agree

> Experienced users don't profit by
> such tests, they know where to look for the (in)security reports and how
> to find out whether the own applications are safe because up to date
> (either because self compilations or using distribution packages which
> are patched).

One can always use the rpm -q --changelog packagename .


> Maybe pointing user's attention to possible security issues is not that
> bad at all as it may rise up sensibility. But too much false positives
> then are counter productive, I fear.

Well, at least i they are new, then the question should be asked. Or at
least googled.

> 
> Regards
> 
> Alexander

--
Ow Mun Heng
Gentoo/Linux on D600 1.4Ghz 
Neuromancer 20:13:12 up 22 min, 1 average: 0.18, 0.16, 0.17