Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: Why 232 rounds?
From: Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:53:49 -0700
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 05:28:59PM +0200, Luis MartinGarcia. wrote:
The easiest way to implement this is exactly as Fyodor suggested, promoting a variable to an unsigned 64-bit integer. I have commited this in r29768, but since the bug is anything but critical, I did that only to my current dev branch at nmap-exp/luis/nmap-npingchanges/nping. I know it looks like this branch is taking forever to be merged into trunk, but I am really planning to do that in the near future ;-)
Thanks Luis, though you might find that merging patches (such as this one) to trunk as they are completed (and tested) may make the merge of your whole branch to trunk easier by limiting the size and number of code changes that need to be done at once. It also makes it easier to detect and isolate regressions. Of course this may not be practical for more involved changes that involve code which has changed substantially since the branch. Also, is nmap-npingchanges currently in a working state? Maybe I need to build it differently or something, but I just get a seg fault when I try to run it. I did a fresh checkout of luis/nmap-npingchanges, compiled, and then: [fyodor@hax nping]$ pwd /home/fyodor/nmap-exp/luis/nmap-npingchanges/nping [fyodor@hax nping]$ gdb nping [cut] (gdb) r scanme.nmap.org Starting program: /home/fyodor/nmap-exp/luis/nmap-npingchanges/nping/nping scanme.nmap.org [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] Using host libthread_db library "/lib64/libthread_db.so.1". Starting Nping 0.5.61TEST4 ( http://nmap.org/nping ) at 2012-09-12 17:51 PDT Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. IPAddress::setIPv4Address (this=0x0, val=<optimized out>) at IPAddress.cc:455 455 this->setVersion4(); Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install glibc-2.14.90-24.fc16.9.x86_64 keyutils-libs-1.5.2-1.fc16.x86_64 krb5-libs-1.9.4-3.fc16.x86_64 libcom_err-1.41.14-2.fc15.x86_64 libgcc-4.6.3-2.fc16.x86_64 libselinux-2.1.6-6.fc16.x86_64 libstdc++-4.6.3-2.fc16.x86_64 openssl-1.0.0j-1.fc16.x86_64 zlib-1.2.5-7.fc16.x86_64 (gdb) bt #0 IPAddress::setIPv4Address (this=0x0, val=<optimized out>) at IPAddress.cc:455 #1 0x0000000000413c8d in spec_to_addresses (target_expr=<optimized out>, af=<optimized out>, addrlist=std::vector of length 0, capacity 0, max_netmask=8 '\b') at utils_net.cc:1831 #2 0x000000000040e282 in NpingOps::setupTargetHosts (this=0x6a3800) at NpingOps.cc:1753 #3 0x0000000000404b38 in main (argc=2, argv=0x7fffffffe038) at nping.cc:167 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:
- Why 232 rounds? . (Sep 09)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Luis MartinGarcia. (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Luis MartinGarcia. (Sep 13)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 17)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Luis MartinGarcia. (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 12)