Re: nmap 6.01 requested address is not valid bug

['David Fifield' <david () bamsoftware com>]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:29:18PM -0500, security-lists wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Fifield [mailto:david () bamsoftware com] 
> > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 06:10
> > To: security-lists
> > Cc: nmap-dev () insecure org
> > Subject: Re: nmap 6.01 requested address is not valid bug
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 10:46:16PM -0500, security-lists wrote:
> > > I still find v6,01 has the "this requested address is not valid," bug.
> > Can
> > > someone verify?
> > >
> > > Platform: Windows XP Home SP3
> > >
> > >
> > > C:\Documents and Settings\Me>nmap -sS -O 10.250.1.0/24
> > >
> > > Starting Nmap 6.01 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2012-07-07 22:20 Central
> > Daylight
> > > Time
> > >
> > > get_srcaddr: can't connect socket: The requested address is not valid in
> > its
> > > con
> > > text.
> > > Failed to convert source address to presentation format!?!  Error: Unknown
> > > error
> >
> > The message "The requested address is not valid in its context" is still
> > printed though it is no longer a fatal error since r28874. When this
> > happens, it uses the address of the interface as the source address
> > instead.
> >
> > What is your "nmap --iflist"? Probably one of the interface addresses is
> > the one causing the error about the presentation format.
>
> C:\Documents and Settings\Me>nmap --iflist
>
> Starting Nmap 6.01 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2012-07-10 12:11 Central Daylight
> Time
>
> ************************INTERFACES************************
> DEV  (SHORT) IP/MASK        TYPE     UP MTU  MAC
> eth0 (eth0)  10.250.1.97/24 ethernet up 1500 00:0A:E4:D1:43:BF
> lo0  (lo0)   127.0.0.1/0    loopback up 1520
>
> DEV    WINDEVICE
> eth0   \Device\NPF_{DB60E43C-545D-46C8-B15B-5F28B14B1B1C}
> lo0    <none>
> <none> \Device\NPF_GenericDialupAdapter
>
> **************************ROUTES**************************
> DST/MASK           DEV  GATEWAY
> 255.255.255.255/32 eth0 10.250.1.97
> 10.255.255.255/32  eth0 10.250.1.97
> 10.250.1.97/32     lo0  127.0.0.1
> 10.250.1.0/24      eth0 10.250.1.97
> 127.0.0.0/8        lo0  127.0.0.1
> 224.0.0.0/4        eth0 10.250.1.97
> 0.0.0.0/0          eth0 10.250.1.3

Can you also please give us the output of
        nmap --route-dst 10.250.1.0 --route-dst 10.250.1.3 nmap --route-dst 10.250.1.10 --route-dst 10.250.1.97

The only strange thing I see in the --iflist output is the netmask of
/0, which I don't suppose is responsible for the error you're seeing.

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