Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark
From: GomoR <nmap-hackers () gomor org>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 10:56:39 +0100
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 08:32:40PM -0300, Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman wrote: [..]
box, and group them. Then, you can use nmap again to only scan the ports that belong to a certain group only, and discover each OS separately.
Well, by sending 8 probes, I do not see how you can be sure to hit only the target open port. It seems 'hope for the best' philosophy here. Results will be unreliable to me. -- ^ ___ ___ 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
Current thread:
- New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark GomoR (Dec 27)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark Hans Nilsson (Dec 27)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman (Dec 27)
- RE: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark Sina Bahram (Dec 27)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark DePriest, Jason R. (Dec 28)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark Hans Nilsson (Dec 28)
- RE: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark Sina Bahram (Dec 27)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark doug (Dec 28)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark Hans Nilsson (Dec 28)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark doug (Dec 28)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark Hans Nilsson (Dec 29)
- Re: New Nmap vs SinFP benchmark GomoR (Dec 28)