Re: Time to lose gen1 OS detection?

[Simon <simon.xhz () gmail com>]

Hi,

  I was just thinking, when gen1 is used to identify a host, why not
have nmap create a new fingerprint for the gen2 and ask the user to
submit that instead? (all ready made)

Simon

On Oct 29, 2007 6:02 PM, kx <kxmail () gmail com> wrote:
> Just to add another side to the thread...
>
> If we dropped gen1 now, gen2 is the only option.
>
> Would that maybe nudge more folks to turn in gen2 submissions, thus
> addressing the gap?
>
> Also, for those who says they have old boxes that aren't in gen2, I
> gotta ask, why haven't you turned in a submission? =)
>
> Cheers,
>   kx
>
>
>
>
> On 10/29/07, Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org> wrote:
> > 1st generation Nmap OS detection had a great run, lasting 9 years.
> > But now that the 2nd generation DB has grown considerably, it may be
> > about time to let gen1 OS detection go.  It complicates the code, and
> > the gen1 DB itself takes up more than 800K of space.
> >
> > Then gen2 system still only has 827 fingerprints compared to 1684 in
> > gen1.  But the new system has better fingerprints, and for more recent
> > and relevant system.
> >
> > So gen1 OS detection will probably be gone in the next release unless
> > I hear from people who can demonstrate good reasons for it to stay.
> > If you scan large networks and find that -O1 still works better than
> > -O2, that's the sort of thing we'd like to hear.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -F
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
> > http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
> > Archived at http://SecLists.Org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
> http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
> Archived at http://SecLists.Org

_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://SecLists.Org