| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
From: godsmoke at godsmoke.com (Christopher Blume) Subject: Comparison of Network Security Scanners Exactly -- how can we trust a test where the company that conducted it, and therefor designed the test is the product that won. Now, of the vendor tests I've seen conducted by a competitor, this one seemed pretty honest (Nessus scored very high). However, they didn't test Retina 5 -- which from what I hear is supposed to be a very big improvement. When I get ahold of it, I'd be happy to run some tests against Nessus. Thank You, Christopher Blume Anders B Jansson wrote: > And to everyones surprise their own product came out on top! > > Wow, it has to be good, film at 11 > > // anders > > Alexander wrote: > >> Hi all! >> >> Comparison of Network Security Scanners: >> >> http://www.maxpatrol.com/pd_cmp2.asp >> >> In this survey the following products were tested: >> 1 IS - Internet Scanner 7.0 Internet Security Systems >> http://www.iss.net >> 2 LG - LanGuard 3.2 GFI >> http://www.gfi.com >> 3 Ns - Nessus 2.0.6 Renaud Deraison< >> http://www.nessus.org >> 4 NR - NetRecon 3.6 Symantec >> http://www.symantec.com >> 5 Rt - Retina 4.9.97 eEye Digital Security >> http://www.eeye.com >> 6 MP - MaxPatrol 7.0 Positive Technologies >> http://www.maxpatrol.com >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. >> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html >> > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists