Our R&D team is continually going thru the content and trying to update any of the scripts that didn't have a patch when released (why they put that text), that does now. it's on ongoing effort. In any case that you know a patch is available you can let us know and we can get them updated as a one (or 2 or 3) off.
In the meantime using the Vulnerability Set should be an option, but I'm currently working an issue that the "Is not Equal to" is not working. I'm not sure of the cause yet, so of course there isn't any solution (yet).
If you run into specific problems let me know, and I can update you on the progress of the other issue.
I'm using 7.0. I've run 4 test reports that contain the following logic:
1. equals Patch Available
2. equals No Patch Available
3. equals Patch NA
4. equals Patch Undetermined
Despite the fact that I'm running against a machine that has several vulnerabilities where patches are not available, the "equals No Patch available" logic yields zero results. Most of the vulnerabilities fall under "Patch Undetermined", which clearly state "McAfee is currently unaware of a vendor-supplied patch or update"...would that be "No patch available"? That seems like something is broken.
Can you explain the logic of how something without a patch becomes patch undetermined?
How reliable is the patch available/not available field?
Sorry, I think you missed my comment above:
"but I'm currently working an issue that the "Is not Equal to" is not working. I'm not sure of the cause yet, so of course there isn't any solution (yet)."
I see you confirmed that anyway.
When I get more details and/or a fix for it, I will post the solution here.
I can work around the "is not equal to" issue, assuming that the patch availability field is accurate.
For example, instead of writing the logic as "is not equal to: No Patch Available", I could just write"
is equal to Patch Available
is equal to Patch Not Determined
is equal to Patch Undetermined
...that should yield the same logic.