Re: regarding rpc based protocols and rpcinfo script

[David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com>]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 02:11:03PM +0200, Toni Ruottu wrote:
> I almost wrote my own rpcinfo because I could not imagine that it
> might not be in the default category. I think every script that is not
> enabled by default should have a comment which explains why. Maybe we
> could form a convention while there are not yet thousands of scripts.
> When the explanation is explicit it is falsifiable and can be
> reconsidered later.
>
> We could have exceptions for cases where the script belongs to version
> category or intrusive category. Writing a comment "non-default reason:
> intrusive" might be useful in cases where the script is later moved
> out from intrusive category, and someone forgets to add it to default.
>
> At the moment there are two intrusive scripts that are run by default.
> Is this an error? I though a script could only belong to one. Also, I
> think we agreed earlier that netbus-auth-bypass should be in default,
> but it is not.

Can you send a patch fixing these problems? I think that intrusive
should not also be in default.

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