Re: TCP ping missing obvious port?

On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 02:27:35PM -0400, Thomas Reinke wrote:
> Just wondering if I'm missing something obvious, but is there
> a reason why the tcp_ping() function within Nessus, used, for
> example, in ping_host() to check if a host is up, will omit
> port 80 as one of the default ports being checked using the
> "built-in" TCP port list?

It's there :

[renaud@myth nasl]$ grep 80 nasl_packet_forgery.c
 int ports[] = { 139, 135, 445, 80, 22, 515, 23, 21, 6000, 1025, 25,
111, 1028, 9100, 1029, 79, 497, 548, 5000, 1917, 53, 161, 9001, 65535,
443, 113, 993, 8080, 0};

(cf item #4)


> Also, since the same function is strategically setting
> the source port for any queries, (e.g. setting port 53
> when querying a DNS server) to increase the likelihood
> of a packet getting through, would it not make sense to
> have either
>   a) The script be able to set the source port, or
>   b) Have the nasl_tcp_ping function use the same
>      source port lookup technique for any user passed
>      ports?

We could do that. However using another list than 'built-in' is not
really recommended because when you use built-in you send packets in
parallel (thus gaining time) whereas supplying your own list makes the
script very slow (waiting for a reply for every port). Also, adding an
option is good but increases the overall complexity of the options - I'm
already getting many "Nessus is too difficult to use" remarks because
the "Options" panel is quite large, so I'd assume that changing the
source port could be something you can modify in your own script ?



				-- Renaud
_______________________________________________
Nessus-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus-devel