Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups
From: Ron <ron () skullsecurity net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 07:44:13 -0600
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This may go back to an issue another person was having recently, where too many scripts would run at once and exhaust all memory. On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:32:59 +0100 "A. Ramos" <aramosf.lists () gmail com> wrote:
http-headers have launched on a large number of IPs and it hung (with http.lua in the 5.35DC1 release): Stats: 0:11:34 elapsed; 6144 hosts completed (7168 up), 1024 undergoing Script Scan NSE: Active NSE Script Threads: 4 (3 waiting) NSE Timing: About 99.60% done; ETC: 12:30 (0:00:02 remaining) NSE: Waiting: 'http-headers' (thread: 0x1b998e0) stack traceback: [C]: in function 'receive' /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:282: in function </usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:275> (tail call): ? /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:675: in function 'next_response' /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:973: in function </usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:942> (tail call): ? /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:1005: in function 'get' /usr/share/nmap/scripts/http-headers.nse:68: in function </usr/share/nmap/scripts/http-headers.nse:49> (tail call): ? NSE: Waiting: 'http-headers' (thread: 0x107ab70) stack traceback: [C]: in function 'receive' /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:282: in function </usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:275> (tail call): ? /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:675: in function 'next_response' /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:973: in function </usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:942> (tail call): ? /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:1005: in function 'get' /usr/share/nmap/scripts/http-headers.nse:68: in function </usr/share/nmap/scripts/http-headers.nse:49> (tail call): ? NSE: Waiting: 'http-headers' (thread: 0xe27a10) stack traceback: [C]: in function 'receive' /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:282: in function </usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:275> (tail call): ? /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:675: in function 'next_response' /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:973: in function </usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:942> (tail call): ? /usr/share/nmap/nselib/http.lua:1005: in function 'get' /usr/share/nmap/scripts/http-headers.nse:68: in function </usr/share/nmap/scripts/http-headers.nse:49> (tail call): ? 2010/11/17 David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com>On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:26:53PM -0600, Ron wrote:On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:12:27 -0800 David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com>wrote:On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 07:08:35PM -0600, David Fifield wrote:On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:03:01PM -0500, Ron wrote:I've spent the past few days cleaning up http.lua functions, and I'm pretty happy with the result I have now. Among other things, I: o Updated the documentation on pretty much every function o Updated the module documentation to discuss how to use http.lua, along with an example o Changed the interface to http.pipeline to work be significantly cleaner, and documented it (I also kept the old interface, which prints a warning and calls the new function) o Made functions 'local' that should have been, and that aren't being used o Document and validate the 'options' table o Document the 'response' table o Change nmap.registry.args.* to stdnse.get_script_args() o Normalized indentation and style, where possible, including function definitions ('function xxx()' instead of 'xxx = function()').This looks good. You can commit it. In general, if you're making style changes only, and people aren't likely to object to the style changes, you can just commit them without asking. I appreciate you keeping backwards-compatible pipeline functions.I'm getting an error with the new pipeline functions: NSE: 'http-userdir-enum' (thread: 0x106b520) against 64.13.134.52:80 threw an error! ./nselib/http.lua:1317: bad argument #1 to 'insert' (table expected, got string) stack traceback: [C]: in function 'insert' ./nselib/http.lua:1317: in function 'pipeline_add' ./scripts/http-userdir-enum.nse:81: in function <./scripts/http-userdir-enum.nse:42> (tail call): ? It looks wrong because http-userdir-enum is calling pipeline_add with three arguments when it should be four. David FifieldOops, I missed the 'all' argument somehow. I fixed it in two places inhttp-userdir-enum, it should be good now. Thanks, works well now. David Fifield _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/-- Alejandro Ramos -- aka dab http://www.securitybydefault.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkzlLa0ACgkQ2t2zxlt4g/QLlACdF0gAYbv4glWRaxiTbHCuSgEA vn0An0dyPNCg02oqQECvaAHgISR9KKIQ =izdZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/
Current thread:
- [NSE] http.lua cleanups Ron (Oct 27)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups David Fifield (Nov 01)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups Ron (Nov 02)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups David Fifield (Nov 17)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups Ron (Nov 17)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups David Fifield (Nov 17)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups A. Ramos (Nov 18)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups Ron (Nov 18)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups David Fifield (Nov 01)
- Re: [NSE] http.lua cleanups Ron (Nov 04)