Difference in detection CVA vs PSI

Today i did a scan on a system which had long time no maintenance, there is a big difference in findings with CVA vs PSI is this explainable ? The host system is Running XP SP2.

The Firefox detection is not in the PSI result because it was updated in between.

[attachment deleted by admin]

CVA is still a BETA and the DB of apps is growing daily. PSI has a larger DB no doubt. Hopefully this will change in the future.

Ewen :slight_smile:

Yeah, I am using both to :slight_smile: ( on demand ). But CVA noticed me about updates of Unlocker and PDFCreator where PSI didn’t :wink:

Greetz, Red.

Yep, CVA is only a new product & still in beta. CVA still needs to grow it’s database, It will take time :slight_smile:

I know, i know (L)

But in regards to the “database has to grow” i would expect it to find at least the most “common” plugins which are under attack now a days. (Flash/Quicktime/Java). I know it can’t find all the “strange” tools around in a small beta deployment but these are almost default install’s. That’s why i was wondering.

Nothing bad to the Guy’s, just wondering…

There is also bugs too. So Bugs can prevent it from detecting these, then there is FP’s, etc to fix. Not just the Database to “expand”

It should detect flash without issues.
BTW you set CVA to scan userdefined paths. What paths did you define? can you rescan all drives?

I selected the one and only drive C:\ as User defined.
I’ll try but i’m not around that specific computer at the moment, maybe later next week.


I loaded some oldstuff on my virtual pc, as you can see in this setup is also doesn’t detect the Flash version.
This time i did a scan all hard drives.


[attachment deleted by admin]

Thanks for testing that. I was completely mistaken then :-[