Nmap Development mailing list archives

Traceroute scripts and their output


From: Jacek Wielemborek <d33tah () gmail com>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:22:25 +0200

List,

Take a look at the following output:

$ nmap --script traceroute-geolocation --script firewalk scanme.Nmap.org
-p 25,24,80   --traceroute

Starting Nmap 6.46 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2014-09-28 14:09 CEST
Nmap scan report for scanme.Nmap.org (74.207.244.221)
Host is up (0.18s latency).
rDNS record for 74.207.244.221: scanme.nmap.org
PORT   STATE    SERVICE
24/tcp closed   priv-mail
25/tcp filtered smtp
80/tcp open     http

Host script results:
| firewalk:
| HOP  HOST        PROTOCOL  BLOCKED PORTS
|_1    172.16.1.1  tcp       25
| traceroute-geolocation:
|   HOP  RTT     ADDRESS                                       GEOLOCATION
|   1    0.58    172.16.1.1                                    - ,-
|   2    11.90   10.200.0.2                                    - ,-
|   3    ...
|   4    ...
|   5    11.93   10.44.10.2                                    - ,-
|   6    ...
|   7    13.67   henet.plix.pl (195.182.218.197)               52,20
Poland (Unknown)
|   8    27.65   10ge1-2.core1.prg1.he.net (184.105.213.241)   37,-121
United States (California)
|   9    30.81   10ge15-3.core1.fra1.he.net (184.105.213.233)  37,-121
United States (California)
|   10   40.02   100ge5-2.core1.par2.he.net (72.52.92.13)      37,-121
United States (California)
|   11   123.28  10ge15-1.core1.ash1.he.net (184.105.213.93)   37,-121
United States (California)
|   12   178.67  10ge9-2.core1.pao1.he.net (184.105.213.177)   37,-121
United States (California)
|   13   183.55  10ge4-4.core3.fmt2.he.net (184.105.222.89)    37,-121
United States (California)
|   14   183.57  router3-fmt.linode.com (65.49.10.218)         37,-122
United States (California)
|_  15   178.38  scanme.nmap.org (74.207.244.221)              37,-121
United States (California)

TRACEROUTE (using port 24/tcp)
HOP RTT       ADDRESS
1   0.58 ms   172.16.1.1
2   11.90 ms  10.200.0.2
3   ... 4
5   11.93 ms  10.44.10.2
6   ...
7   13.67 ms  henet.plix.pl (195.182.218.197)
8   27.65 ms  10ge1-2.core1.prg1.he.net (184.105.213.241)
9   30.81 ms  10ge15-3.core1.fra1.he.net (184.105.213.233)
10  40.02 ms  100ge5-2.core1.par2.he.net (72.52.92.13)
11  123.28 ms 10ge15-1.core1.ash1.he.net (184.105.213.93)
12  178.67 ms 10ge9-2.core1.pao1.he.net (184.105.213.177)
13  183.55 ms 10ge4-4.core3.fmt2.he.net (184.105.222.89)
14  183.57 ms router3-fmt.linode.com (65.49.10.218)
15  178.38 ms scanme.nmap.org (74.207.244.221)

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 62.92 seconds

In addition to my previous post about enhancing port scanning output
with NSE-defined columns (http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/2014/q3/500), I
would like to suggest a change in the output format here as well:

TRACEROUTE (using port 24/tcp):
HOP RTT       ADDRESS                                      GEOLOCATION
1   0.58 ms   172.16.1.1                                   - ,-
|_firewalk: blocked ports: 25
2   11.90 ms  10.200.0.2                                   - ,-
3   ... 4
5   11.93 ms  10.44.10.2                                   - ,-
6   ...
7   13.67 ms  henet.plix.pl (195.182.218.197)              52,20 Poland
(Unknown)
8   27.65 ms  10ge1-2.core1.prg1.he.net (184.105.213.241)  37,-121
United States (California)
9   30.81 ms  10ge15-3.core1.fra1.he.net (184.105.213.233) 37,-121
United States (California)
10  40.02 ms  100ge5-2.core1.par2.he.net (72.52.92.13)     37,-121
United States (California)
11  123.28 ms 10ge15-1.core1.ash1.he.net (184.105.213.93)  37,-121
United States (California)
12  178.67 ms 10ge9-2.core1.pao1.he.net (184.105.213.177)  37,-121
United States (California)
13  183.55 ms 10ge4-4.core3.fmt2.he.net (184.105.222.89)   37,-121
United States (California)
14  183.57 ms router3-fmt.linode.com (65.49.10.218)        37,-121
United States (California)
15  178.38 ms scanme.nmap.org (74.207.244.221)             37,-121
United States (California)

This would make it more readable because instead of reading three
traceroute lists, user would have to run through just one.

What do you think about this suggestion?

Jacek

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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

Current thread: