The systems 1. In all cases, the target has been a Fedora Core 1 Linux systems with all available updates applied. Between the test 1 series and the test 2 and 3 series, a cups printer server was defined with a shared printer.
2. The systems performing the tests are a ix86 (32 bit) and an amd64 (64 bit) systems. in both cases the nessus software is 2.0.10a with two patches: - a patch to nessus-config so it does -L/usr/lib on the ix86 and -L/usr/lib64 on the amd64 (to keep libtool happy). - patch to rlimit in nessusd to set the value to 40*1024*1024 or nessusd fails on the amd64 due to the 8 byte pointers requiring more memory space. The binaries were built on the respecify systems but other that the patches listed above, they are the same. When I performed the scans on the two systems, I got different test results which bothers me a bit. I believe these test should be highly repeatable so this says there may be a problem on the amd64 system. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32 bit test 1 run: SUMMARY - Number of hosts which were alive during the test : 1 - Number of security holes found : 4 - Number of security warnings found : 10 - Number of security notes found : 22 TESTED HOSTS 192.168.17.90 (Security holes found) DETAILS + 192.168.17.90 : . List of open ports : o ssh (22/tcp) (Security hole found) o sunrpc (111/tcp) (Security notes found) o unknown (615/tcp) (Security notes found) o unknown (635/tcp) (Security notes found) o nessus (1241/tcp) (Security warnings found) o nfs (2049/tcp) (Security warnings found) o sometimes-rpc3 (32770/tcp) (Security notes found) o sometimes-rpc5 (32771/tcp) (Security warnings found) o sometimes-rpc7 (32772/tcp) (Security notes found) o sunrpc (111/udp) (Security notes found) o general/udp (Security hole found) o hmmp-ind (612/udp) (Security warnings found) o unknown (632/udp) (Security notes found) o nfs (2049/udp) (Security hole found) o omad (32768/udp) (Security warnings found) o sometimes-rpc4 (32770/udp) (Security warnings found) o general/tcp (Security warnings found) o general/icmp (Security warnings found) o unknown (632/tcp) (Security hole found) . Vulnerability found on port ssh (22/tcp) : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 64 bit test 1 run: SUMMARY - Number of hosts which were alive during the test : 1 - Number of security holes found : 4 - Number of security warnings found : 10 - Number of security notes found : 21 TESTED HOSTS 192.168.17.90 (Security holes found) DETAILS + 192.168.17.90 : . List of open ports : o ssh (22/tcp) (Security hole found) o sunrpc (111/tcp) (Security notes found) o unknown (615/tcp) (Security notes found) o unknown (635/tcp) (Security notes found) o nessus (1241/tcp) (Security warnings found) o nfs (2049/tcp) (Security warnings found) o sometimes-rpc3 (32770/tcp) (Security notes found) o sometimes-rpc5 (32771/tcp) (Security warnings found) o sometimes-rpc7 (32772/tcp) (Security notes found) o sunrpc (111/udp) (Security notes found) o hmmp-ind (612/udp) (Security warnings found) o unknown (632/udp) (Security notes found) o nfs (2049/udp) (Security hole found) o omad (32768/udp) (Security hole found) o sometimes-rpc4 (32770/udp) (Security warnings found) o general/udp (Security notes found) o general/icmp (Security warnings found) o general/tcp (Security warnings found) o unknown (632/tcp) (Security hole found) . Vulnerability found on port ssh (22/tcp) : ------------------------------------------------------------------ Rather than using bandwidth with similar stuff from tests 2 and 3, I will say that the results are available if needed. Are such discrepancies common? If anything is correct then it should be the ix32 stuff. This means that something "strange" is happening on the amd64. Comments? -- Gene _______________________________________________ Nessus mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus
