reason of rating about check_sslscan HOT 2 CLOSED

Even though having this kind of information shown in nagios/icinga/… could be useful, I'd say "no" due to several reasons:

• the perfdata/status length in nagios/icinga/nrpe and others is limited. I don't know what exact length is allowed, but I played around with "more verbose" checks and perfdata a while ago and ran into that limit (fwiw, nrpe has or had a limit or 1kb). If this changed in the meantime, fine. Then this argument would be invalid.
• not getting an A-grade can have several reasons. I believe it's not wise to have – in worst case – dozens of informations in a tiny result field, instead of just looking at the ssltest webpage to see what's wrong.
• the information is simply not (fully) provided by the api. Even though there are some hints like "vulnBeast": true, the list is incomplete and needs interpretation (i.e. accepting which ciphers would lead to downgrade etc.), which would be overkill for this (simple) check scripts.
• the required information is not provided at all when checking cached results.

from check_sslscan.

the status field in icinga2 seems to be much bigger than in icinga/nagios etc... It would be still nice to have some more information there. It could be an "verbose" version of the status... A lot of checks has a verbose version of the output :)

from check_sslscan.