pen-test
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: NMAP Concurrent Scans

To: pen-test@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: NMAP Concurrent Scans
From: "Burak CIFTER" <hybridus.ml@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:53:11 +0300
Cc: Clone <en0lc@yahoo.com>
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: pentest-list2@consult.net
Delivered-to: mailing list pen-test@securityfocus.com
Delivered-to: moderator for pen-test@securityfocus.com
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=q+z/fOuRMegLn/154T5nH/RU7ocKr3GA703aubFLIayHC6weubpCatAy5wDRK6HEtFmEDhBFZzL68mr0YY+c4TLTTAzlKkOh2Hx288+ft49oLer5hsHkXoDw4kdOnlTZqe97rktVQxRsH/mKNzQJ3WliDlmb+4EPWF8hEX18h7g=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=T3CIPL7EnxT5rJ5DJXgs1hoI8miQDrxp3TyexGdg/jWYRRci9Kp7W/dZkbyGSOTB7xCQs6MMOr0m5MxvGDoLKDK3MOzqn1C9Sr80xC5TQT6SrEZcoh+qgZCUVlDc0XA5cxL07Sqy1CWDhUvX9Kylj3J+dJplRp5n8L4EH69TNCw=
In-reply-to: <211117.55584.qm@web44816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
List-help: <mailto:pen-test-help@securityfocus.com>
List-id: <pen-test.list-id.securityfocus.com>
List-post: <mailto:pen-test@securityfocus.com>
List-subscribe: <mailto:pen-test-subscribe@securityfocus.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:pen-test-unsubscribe@securityfocus.com>
Mailing-list: contact pen-test-help@securityfocus.com; run by ezmlm
References: <211117.55584.qm@web44816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Resent-date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 01:46:40 -0600 (MDT)
Resent-from: pen-test-return-1078484806@securityfocus.com
Resent-message-id: <20070811074640.30E68F81FB@outgoing2.securityfocus.com>
Resent-sender: listbounce@securityfocus.com
Sender: listbounce@securityfocus.com
It may return false result due to ids/firewall rules. If there's no
firewall, you won't need to do xmas scan. So I understand that the
host is protected somehow. In this case (scanning with all techniques
in the same time), the result wouldn't be reliable.

You should perform the scan using techniques in an order from paranoid
level of sensivity to connect scan.



Burak Çifter


On 8/10/07, Clone <en0lc@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I'm new to NMAP. I have a curious question that I
> wanted to get expert opinion on...
>
> I was wondering whether running SYN, FIN, XMAS, NULL
> and ACK scans in parallel on a target generate false
> results. Since same client IP is  asking for opening &
> closing a connection on target machine will it not
>  render some ports open and other closed in the
> report?
>
> RGDS
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! 
> FareChase.
> http://farechase.yahoo.com/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This list is sponsored by: Cenzic
>
> Need to secure your web apps NOW?
> Cenzic finds more, "real" vulnerabilities fast.
> Click to try it, buy it or download a solution FREE today!
>
> http://www.cenzic.com/downloads
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by: Cenzic

Need to secure your web apps NOW?
Cenzic finds more, "real" vulnerabilities fast.
Click to try it, buy it or download a solution FREE today!

http://www.cenzic.com/downloads
------------------------------------------------------------------------


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>