Nmap Development mailing list archives

Re: FW: Bug in default ZENMAP GUI


From: David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 10:21:18 -0700

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:55:19PM -0800, Fyodor wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 06:36:58PM -0700, David Fifield wrote:

The default scan ("Intense scan") is

    nmap -T4 -A -v -PE -PS22,25,80 -PA21,23,80,3389

We picked this in August '08 [1] back when we only did 2 host
discovery probes by default.  But roughly a year later we expanded the
default to four probes, so maybe we should remove all these ugly
discovery options from the default now?  They could also be removed
from the many other shipped-by-default profiles which include them.
This would leave the default profile as "nmap -T4 -A -v -PE
[targets]".  One exception is that we should probably leave enhanced
discovery in the 'Slow comprehensive scan' profile, but we should
check David's discovery research stats to ensure the choices are
optimal.

Yes, that's a good idea. I just checked that in for the profiles that
used -PE -PS22,25,80 -PA21,23,80,3389.

Slow comprehensive scan ping is

-PE -PP -PS21,22,23,25,80,113,31339 -PA80,113,443,10042 -PO

That sends 14 ping probes. The highest number of probes for which I
found a proven optimal result was 7, with

-PO1 -PS80,443 -PA3389 -PP -PU40125 -PY --source-port 53

The 7-probe combination found 93.65% of available hosts. (Compare that
to 87.74% for the 4 probes we use now.) I have lower bounds for 8- and
9-probe combinations, which are 94.71% and 94.98% respectively.

Unfortunately I don't still have the scan files from the ping probe
survey, otherwise I could calculate its effectiveness directly. What do
you want to do with the Slow comprehensive scan, change it to the best
7-probe combination?

For these results I'm referring to
http://www.bamsoftware.com/wiki/Nmap/EffectivenessOfPingProbes, under
"Exclusion of ACK-filtered host".

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


Current thread: