A vulnerability scanner detected an obsolete version of an open-source file-sharing application on one of a company's Linux servers. While the software version is no longer supported by the OSS community, the company's Linux vendor backported fixes, applied them for all current vulnerabilities, and agrees to support the software in the future.
Based on this agreement, this finding is BEST categorized as a:
A false positive occurs when a vulnerability scanner identifies an issue that doesn't actually pose a risk due to known mitigating factors. In this case, the vulnerability scanner detected an obsolete version of an open-source file-sharing application. However, the company's Linux vendor has backported fixes and agreed to support the software, meaning that the vulnerabilities the scanner flagged have been addressed. Therefore, the scanner's detection is not indicative of a real, unresolved vulnerability, making this a false positive.
It is TRUE POSITIVE; the scanner correctly identified the vulnerability. The Vendor only found a walkaround it does not mean the scanner's finding was invalid.
, the company's Linux vendor backported fixes, applied them for all current vulnerabilities, Meaning there weren't any vulnerabilities and the scanner detected a false positive. the vulnerability doesn't exist because the software is patched and will continue to be so.
False positive. this happens all the time with RedHat packages. The versioning is different from the community's
Based on the given scenario, the finding is a false positive. A false positive is a result that is reported as positive but is actually negative. In this case, the vulnerability scanner detected an obsolete version of the file-sharing application, but the company's Linux vendor backported fixes and agreed to support the software in the future, which means the vulnerability has been addressed and the finding is not accurate.
A true positive in this context would mean that the vulnerability scanner correctly identified a genuine vulnerability. However, given that the Linux vendor has backported fixes and agreed to support the software, the vulnerability is no longer present, making it a false positive. So, the correct categorization is: C. false positive. This means that the scanner flagged a vulnerability that doesn't actually exist due to the vendor's actions.
While the alert was TRUE for a vulnerability. It wasn't exploited so that is not a True positive in that light. Also, question says "based on this agreement" meaning now we are good.. it was a False Positive Source: Verifying each answer against Chat GPT, my experience, other test banks, a written book, and weighing in the discussion from all users to create a 100% accurate guide for myself before I take the exam. (It isn't easy because of the time needed, but it is doing my diligence)
C. false positive. A false positive occurs when a vulnerability scanner identifies a vulnerability that doesn't actually exist or isn't relevant due to mitigating circumstances. In this case, the scanner detected an obsolete version of the open-source file-sharing application and flagged it as a vulnerability. However, the company's Linux vendor has backported fixes for all current vulnerabilities and agreed to support the software in the future. This means that the flagged vulnerability is not an actual risk, and therefore, it is a false positive.
false positive because this is a non issue based on the prior agreement. it shows up as a vulnerability when it shouldn't.
Reading comprehension, folks. [...obsolete version...no longer supported by the OSS community] It would be a true positive for the rest of the world, yes. BUT The question doesn't ask about the rest of the world. The question asks: Based on this agreement, [...vendor backported fixes...applied them...and agrees to support...in the future] this finding is BEST categorized as a: [ C ] FALSE POSITIVE (for this company)
This all depends on whether the vendor backported the fix after the vulnerability has been found or before. Knowing this would allow to know if it is a true positive or a false positive.
C: If a vulnerability is patched, but the patch is not recognized by the vulnerability scanner, it is a false positive report. Reporting "Vulnerability!" where there is none, is a false positive.
Right we need to clarify what backporting is. In my book Backporting is when a software patch is taken from a recent software version and applied to an older version. This is done to address security flaws in legacy software or older versions of the software. How on earth does anyone have this as a false positive when backporting was necessary to fix an issue? That is a true positive.
"BASED ON THIS AGREEMENT" this finding is BEST categorized as..... C false positive
Wouldnt it be A since it did find the obsolete OS and the even though there is a patch from the company the patch is currerntly not on the system scanned
A. True positive. In vulnerability scanning, a "true positive" refers to a situation where the scanner correctly identifies a real vulnerability or issue. In this case, the vulnerability scanner detected an obsolete version of an open-source file-sharing application, and even though the software version is no longer supported by the open-source community, the Linux vendor has backported fixes, applied them, and agreed to support the software in the future. This means that the vulnerability scanner correctly identified a real issue that needs attention, making it a true positive.
This would be a true positive because a vulnerability was found and even though that specific vulnerability wasn't patches others were
I also say A because the way the question is worded. The scanner found the vulnerability but it is mentioned that there are fixes to that vulnerability but it didn't say that the IT techs have applied those fixes
It wouldn't matter if the application had been patched with patches from the vendor. The scanner is not able to recognize this and is comparing the software product to a specific list that states it is no longer supported from its original means. It is not uncommon for applications like Nessus to provide false positives and to correct them they need to manually updated to prevent the app from repeated finds.
False Positive (FP): Reality: No wolf threatened. Shepherd said: "Wolf." Outcome: Villagers are angry at shepherd for waking them up.