Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: SoC: port state reasons
From: Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:21:34 -0700
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 11:02:58PM +0200, Eddie Bell wrote:
Only printing IPs that are different from the host being scanned is a great idea. Should I attempt to resolve the IP addresses as well? Print a hostname if available otherwise just the IP?
That is a good idea. But I think for now we should stick with the IP. Because the rDNS name can be misleading -- forward DNS on that hostname might give a completely different IP. This can be accidental or malicious. Printing both would be ideal, but I don't think we have room. So I'd just stick with the IP for now. Resolution can be slow, too. Cheers, -F _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Current thread:
- SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 07)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman (Jun 07)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 09)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Martin Mačok (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)