Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Nmap Online
From: "Dave Moore" <dave.j.moore () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 06:52:27 -0600
On 12/1/06, Mike Huber <michael.huber () gmail com> wrote:
first of all, IANAL, but the TOS seem to cover the basics... However, I am unsure whether they would hold up under strict legal scrutiny. As far as I can tell, they may hold up under US criminal law, but not under civil law, as tort law has its own wonderful little eccentricities. The best safeguard they seem to have is that they must log the source IP of all scan requests... As far as I know, anyone who takes the time to read the nmap man page should be able to craft a scan which won't be detected by the scanned host (can someone be a definitive source on this point?), and anyone taking malicious action ought to be taking sufficient precautions to avoid detection anyway. None-the-less, my 8-ball sees litigation in their future.
All nmap scans are detectable. All port scans are detectable. Just depends on how hard you're looking. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: Nmap Online, (continued)
- Re: Nmap Online David Swafford (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Michael Holstein (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Randal L. Schwartz (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Dude VanWinkle (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Randal L. Schwartz (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Dude VanWinkle (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Dude VanWinkle (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Randal L. Schwartz (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Dude VanWinkle (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Michael Holstein (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Jason Miller (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Dude VanWinkle (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Randal L. Schwartz (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online Dude VanWinkle (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online David Matousek (Dec 01)
- Re: Nmap Online endrazine (Dec 01)