Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark

["Hans Nilsson" <hasse_gg () ftml net>]

He could have tried to use Nmap against the individual ports in the last
test, like he did with SinFP. Even though it supposedly is "MUCH less
reliable" it would have been an interesting comparison.


On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 23:56:33 +0100, "GomoR" <nmap-hackers () gomor org>
said:
> Hi,
>
> I told the author to re-test using latest Nmap, and here 
> are the results:
>
> http://www.phocean.net/index.php/post/2006/12/24/Updated-%3A-SinFP-205-and-Nmap-420
>
> Best regards,
>
> -- 
>   ^  ___  ___             http://www.GomoR.org/          <-+
>   | / __ |__/          Systems & Security Engineer         |
>   | \__/ |  \     ---[ zsh$ alias psed='perl -pe ' ]---    |
>   +-->  Net::Frame <=> http://search.cpan.org/~gomor/  <---+
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
> http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
> Archived at http://SecLists.Org
-- 
  Hans Nilsson
  hasse_gg () ftml net

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different…


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