4.03 "write buffer not large enough" and "-q (quiet)"

[Brandon Enright <bmenrigh () ucsd edu>]

Even with the increase of writebuflen I still often get a write buffer
error like this one:

log_vwrite: write buffer not large enough -- need to increase from 65536
to at least 337219 (logt == 1).  Please email this message to
fyodor () insecure org.  Quitting.

Typically this happens when I'm being too aggressive with the timing
arguments or when someone has a firewall that adapts about halfway
through the scan.  Rather than increasing the write buffer beyond 64k
I'd like to see an option like the proposed -q that would suppress long
port list output.  The description of -q makes it sound like it is the
opposite of -v.  I still want to use -v but I don't want to be bombarded
with highly repetitive and often useless information.

Rather than getting output like this --

(The 34179 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed)
... long list of filtered and open ports ...


I'd like the option of not printing any port state with a frequency
higher than say, 1024.  Something like this --

(The 65531 ports scanned but not shown below are in states: closed or
filtered)
... short list of open ports ...


This seems like it would eliminate the need to increase the write buffer
size again and at the same time, not sacrifice (much) information.

Does this sound like the job for -q or is this something different?

Brandon

-- 
Brandon Enright
Network Security Analyst
UCSD ACS/Network Operations
bmenrigh () ucsd edu



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