Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: [nmap-svn] r26641 - nmap
From: Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 19:35:24 -0700
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:59:40AM +0200, Luis MartinGarcia. wrote:
On 09/20/2011 01:37 AM, commit-mailer () insecure org wrote: Since the symbol ":" is not allowed in hostnames or IPv4 addresses, can't we make Nmap assume "-6" by default when one of the targets contains ":"? I don't see any case where a user would use ":" in a target if he doesn't mean IPv6. Even in the remote case that we wanted to support syntaxes like "insecure.org:443", we could always check for more than one colon, since IPv6 addresses have a least two (eg. fe80::1).
That is a good idea, but I'm worried that it might cause more user confusion. If we could always determine via heuristics what sort of address to scan, I think it would be worth doing. But there will always be common ambiguous cases (e.g. dual stack hostnames like scanme.nmap.org) where we don't know the user's preferred protocol unless the user tells us. So we might as well train them to use -6 when they need IPv6. And what would we do if the user specified an IPv6 address and an IPv4 one? Also, target specifiers given from standard input ("-iL -") could be a problem. Also, most other networking tools don't seem to do this sort of auto-detection. E.g. we have ping and ping6, traceroute and traceroute6, etc. So we should probably be consistent unless we find a good reason for differing. Cheers, Fyodor _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/
Current thread:
- Re: [nmap-svn] r26641 - nmap Fyodor (Oct 05)
- Re: [nmap-svn] r26641 - nmap Toni Ruottu (Oct 06)
- Re: [nmap-svn] r26641 - nmap David Fifield (Oct 06)
- Re: [nmap-svn] r26641 - nmap Fyodor (Oct 08)
- Re: [nmap-svn] r26641 - nmap David Fifield (Oct 06)
- Re: [nmap-svn] r26641 - nmap Toni Ruottu (Oct 06)