Re: [NSE API] Separate Dnet Objects?

[majek04 <majek04+nmap-dev () gmail com>]

>  I see a couple different ways to organize the socket object(s):
>
>  - - A connect()-only-style object via nmap.new_socket() and a separate
>  "raw" object that includes pcap and dnet.
>
>  - - An all-in-one object with connect()-style networking, raw packet
>  receiving via pcap, and raw ethernet frame sending via dnet.  This is
>  what I prefer.
>
>  Is there are particular reason for this?

Yes. Both pcap and sockets, use nsock library. The socket object
contains of very similar fields, like nsock descriptor or timeout.
So it was rather obvious to use the same object.

On the other hand dnet doesn't share any fields with sockets.
Dnet only needs to have dnet ethernet descriptor.
(which is cached, but that's a different story).

The next thing is ip_send method that I created on dnet object.
http://ai.pjwstk.edu.pl/~majek/private/nmap/nse-pcap-u2/partial/nsepcap-sendip.diff

Maybe there should be the same interface for sending ip packets as for sending
ethernet frames?

What do you think about something like:
nmap.send_packet(packet_data, layer)
// layer values: 2->ethernet, 3->ip


> If not, is it too late to
>  change this?  Only promiscuous.nse appears to require the dnet
>  functionality, so that's the only script that would need changing.
>  Maybe an NSE student can do this this summer.

No, it's not too late. I can change it.

Marek Majkowski

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