Michael Meyer wrote: > *** Michael Wiegand <[email protected]> wrote: >> * Chandrashekhar B [ 8. May 2009]: >>> Instead we could add a statement with the description, "This may be a >>> False Positive...". >> Yes, I think this would be a good idea. We could define a standard >> disclaimer text which plugins could use whenever they try remote version >> identification. > > Ok, somebody must define this "disclaimer". Any volunteers? :-) > I saw that the newest plugins from secpod contains the following: > > ***** > NOTE: Please, ignore the warning if Patch is already applied. > ***** > > Is that enough? > > Micha
Something a bit more explanatory might be appropriate. Perhaps NOTE: This test relied on version number information retrieved from a banner, and as such may be a false positive. Please ensure you have the latest updates applied. or NOTE: This test relied on version number information retrieved from a banner. If the OS vendor's banner number identification scheme isn't in line with the software's version number scheme, this test might be a false positive. Please ensure you have the latest updates applied. Thomas _______________________________________________ Openvas-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss
