Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Security

+ - Choosing a web vulnerability scanner->

Submitted by mutu310
mutu310 (1546975) writes "I've recently joined a web development company that creates websites (generally ASP.NET) for clients, and I've noticed that the web security is not so high, and especially the older websites are quite vulnerable. Since it is not feasible to do manual auditing on all websites, the automated scanner is probably the way to go with limited training. I've been handed the complicated task of deciding which is the best web vulnerability scanner, but I can't make up my mind because there doesn't seem to be recent (and fair) comparisons done. Do you have any experience with web vulnerability scanners? If so, do you have an unbiased recommendation?"
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Wtf is xxx? (Score 1) 273

by mutu310 (#32742464) Attached to: ICANN Approves<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.xxx Suffix For Porn Websites
Your suggestions fail to make sense for the following reasons: 1) xxx is language-independent unlike your suggestions which are in English. 2) Something might be of sexual nature and deemed unsuitable for kids without being pornographic, hence ".porn" does not make sense. 3) Something might be targeted to adults, or else censored for adults (eg involving violence) and not be of sexual nature, hence ".adult" would be far too broad a term for what they are trying to achieve. 4) Something might be of sexual nature without involving sex, hence ".sex" might be confusing. 5) Regarding different cultures, I strongly believe that the meaning of a word lies strictly in its use. Once the Internet starts using .xxx, cultures will adapt and it will be universally understood as so.

Comment: Re:Opinionated Article is Confusing (Score 0, Redundant) 266

by mutu310 (#32169298) Attached to: Why Google Needs To Pull the Plug On Chrome OS
Where's the super-like button? So many people use a PC *JUST* for browsing. They don't even need Google docs or printing or the like. They just want a browser. And currently they have to pay for more expensive hardware that can do all the extra background processing and support so many other features that they don't need or want to use, and are occasionally confusing to them. These same people will have a faster, cheaper experience.

Comment: Slimline desktop (Score 1) 697

by mutu310 (#29870369) Attached to: Low-Power Home Linux Server?
Try looking for an old slimline desktop PC from eBay. Some have very low specs. I personally bought 12 of these when I found them at a real bargain price. The model I have is IBM Netvista A40p, I bought them for around $35 each (including shipping from Germany) and they have 1GHz and 256MB RAM. I guess when saving is what you want, buying new hardware kind of defies the point. These do the trick, and their usage is low (when I did some tests I saw around 25W usage).

Comment: Re:No, Clearly a Horrible Anti-Fair Use Ruling (Score 3, Interesting) 407

by mutu310 (#29038607) Attached to: Judge Rules Against RealDVD
Or perhaps record labels and software companies should be forced by law to send replacement CDs/DVDs for free if you mail them a scratched disc with a self-addressed envelope. Of course, this has its cons though, such as a very good replica fooling the company that the disc is original, and they would send an original one back.

"Hey Ivan, check your six." -- Sidewinder missile jacket patch, showing a Sidewinder driving up the tail of a Russian Su-27

Working...