Attacks/Breaches
6/11/2010
12:54 AM
100%
0%

The Truth About Vulnerability Scanners

Scanning tools can help detect vulnerabilities, but they shouldn't be the only tools on your belt. Here's a look at three areas where scanners fall short

Excerpted from "Scanning Reality: Limits of Automated Vulnerability Scanners," a new report posted today in Dark Reading's Vulnerability Management Tech Center.

In some enterprises, the term "vulnerability management" begins and ends with scanning tools. For these enterprises, improving vulnerability management simply means bringing in more scanners to ensure a broad view.

But are network-based vulnerability scanners and Web application scanning tools enough to ensure that your organization will identify and remediate its security vulnerabilities -- before they are exploited by the bad guys? We submit that most IT organizations have a limited understanding of what these tools can do -- and where they fall short.

There are three key limitations of vulnerability scanners. Some of the risks around these problems can be mitigated by incorporating additional technologies into your vulnerability management program, while others are beyond the scope of any automated technology.

Whatever mitigation strategy is used to fill the gap left by these scanners, the first step is to understand their shortcomings.

The first problem area is authentication. Network-based vulnerability scanners are imperfect tools at best. Even when they are properly configured, they detect only vulnerabilities for which they have signatures. While anonymous (unauthenticated) scanning can provide some benefit, failure to leverage authenticated scanning dramatically reduces scanner effectiveness.

A second key problem is the scanner's inability to work with custom applications. CVE-based, known vulnerabilities are only a small subset of most organizations' overall attack surfaces. Security checks may exist for the most popular applications and operating systems hosted within your network, but what about the custom applications you have written in-house or outsourced to third parties? There are no CVEs for custom apps.

Finally, most vulnerability scanning tools can identify points of weakness, but they can't anticipate complex attack schemes. While vulnerability scanners typically identify and report on issues that can be utilized as the initial point of entry, they are limited in identifying the complex avenues an attacker could take to compromise your network.

Automated vulnerability scanners play a critical role in helping you manage and understand the security risks that may exist within your environment. However, like any tool, the capabilities and results of these tools need to be fully understood and their limitations noted.

To get details on these key limitations, and some recommendations on how to address them, download the full report.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading December Tech Digest
Experts weigh in on the pros and cons of end-user security training.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-2037
Published: 2014-11-26
Openswan 2.6.40 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and IKE daemon restart) via IKEv2 packets that lack expected payloads. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE 2013-6466.

CVE-2014-6609
Published: 2014-11-26
The res_pjsip_pubsub module in Asterisk Open Source 12.x before 12.5.1 allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (crash) via crafted headers in a SIP SUBSCRIBE request for an event package.

CVE-2014-6610
Published: 2014-11-26
Asterisk Open Source 11.x before 11.12.1 and 12.x before 12.5.1 and Certified Asterisk 11.6 before 11.6-cert6, when using the res_fax_spandsp module, allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (crash) via an out of call message, which is not properly handled in the ReceiveFax dia...

CVE-2014-7141
Published: 2014-11-26
The pinger in Squid 3.x before 3.4.8 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information or cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read and crash) via a crafted type in an (1) ICMP or (2) ICMP6 packet.

CVE-2014-7142
Published: 2014-11-26
The pinger in Squid 3.x before 3.4.8 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information or cause a denial of service (crash) via a crafted (1) ICMP or (2) ICMP6 packet size.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Now that the holiday season is about to begin both online and in stores, will this be yet another season of nonstop gifting to cybercriminals?