From: intel96 (intel96@bellsouth.net)
Date: Tue Jun 14 2005 - 21:11:59 EDT
One question I have not seen yet concerning is why PenTest is: To
justify your job and a budget. On one project a customer had a harden
Internet router, a Cisco PIX firewall, and IDS from ISS and an IPS from
TippingPoint. All scanning (NMAP, Nessus, etc.) was pointless,
everything was bocked except port 80 and 443. Most web logins required
SecurID tokens (brute forcing these right..!!) I was able to used SQL
injections to create local accounts, upload files, but not download,
because all outbound requested went through a proxy. The customer even
reconfigured the network each day to see if they could catch.
Now the biggest questions that I get from the customer is how did you
bypass by filters (IDS, IPS) and I need you to rewrite the final report
so I can obtain more funding.........to buy more security and hire more
people.....the biggest hole that I found was the lack of security
internal process. These things require leadership to fix not more
funding!!!!!!!!! How do you state that in a report?
So IMHO every project is different based on the customer's needs (more
funding and more head count). The other issue is how to set the clowns
apart from the professionals, which is becoming harder to do because
there are more clowns and not enough professional and the clowns are
hurting the rest of us....
Thanks,
Intel96
Tarun The Nut wrote:
>when i mentioned vulnerabilities that are exploitable, i meant not
>only being able to "exploit" the vulnerability but also map all the
>possible paths of attack.
>
>Also by plugging a vulnerability does not necessarily means "patching"
>but taking all possible steps (patches/tools/processes blah blah) that
>can help mitigating a possible exploit of the vulnerability.
>
>The question still remains: Pen Test will always depend on the skill
>set of the company/individual contracted to do Pen Test and results
>will vary from person to person (or company to company).
>
>Thankx to Pete Herzog for bringing it out. It skipped my mind to
>include that in my previous mails.
>
>Is it not feasible to assume that the real attacker will be able to
>exploit the vulnerability using any one of the numerous attack paths
>and go about ensuring the vulnerability is "plugged" based on the
>phased approach described in one of my mails earlier?
>
>Regards
>
>
>On 6/14/05, Gareth Davies <gareth.davies@mynetsec.com> wrote:
>
>
>>tarunthenut@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>hi,
>>>thanx to everyone for brain-stroming on this point.
>>>
>>>i asked this question cause i failed to understand why certain clients are bent on penetration testing cause the results totally depend on the skill set of the person/company performing the penetration testing.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Yeah that's pretty much how I see it too.
>>
>>Most clients request a pen test because they don't know what it is, it
>>sounds more exciting.
>>
>>What they actually want is a VA, I've had this issue a few times.
>>
>>When it comes down to it, they don't want you to actually exploit their
>>servers, as the machines are live and they can't face the possibility of
>>downtime.
>>
>>They don't mind snapshots of passive intrusion (through non passworded
>>services, or weak/default u/p combinations, open root shares,
>>unprotected NFS mounts and so on).
>>
>>IMHO a full pen-test consists of a VA but it goes one step further, into
>>the realm of actually confirming the exploits will work (as an example,
>>sendmail is often pegged as being vulnerable, but many OS's update the
>>service without changing the banner, so according to the banner it's
>>vulnerable, in reality it's not).
>>
>>I generally like to strike a balance somewhere in between where possible.
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>--
>>Gareth Davies
>>
>>Manager - Security Practice
>>
>>Network Security Solutions MSC Sdn. Bhd.
>>Suite E-07-21, Block E, Plaza Mont' Kiara, No. 2 Jalan Kiara,
>>Mont' Kiara, 50480
>>Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
>>Phone: +603-6203 5303
>>
>>www.mynetsec.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Apr 12 2008 - 10:54:25 EDT