Nmap Announce mailing list archives
Re: distributed nmap?
From: Lance Spitzner <lance () ksni net>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 08:31:59 -0600 (CST)
On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Arturo Busleiman wrote:
Why not adding a --agent x.x.x.x [port] parameter? It would turn nmap into an agent, and the 'boss' client would be running at x.x.x.x (port [port] if specified) It would be easier, the boss client would be nmap --boss n it then would sit there waiting till 'n' agents connect, then allowing to enter scan options/targets, send them to each agent (of course, it would distribute the port range among them!!).
That sounds like a great idea, but it could backfire on Fyodor. The distributed method sounds alot like the DDoS tools that have gotten so much publicity. Many people who do not understand nmap may consider this new feature a threat. Something to keep in mind :) Lance Spitzner http://www.enteract.com/~lspitz/papers.html
Current thread:
- distributed nmap? Lorell Hathcock (Mar 18)
- Re: distributed nmap? Thomas Reinke (Mar 18)
- Re: distributed nmap? Arturo Busleiman (Mar 18)
- Re: distributed nmap? Lance Spitzner (Mar 19)
- Re: distributed nmap? Frasnelli, Dan (Mar 19)
- Re: distributed nmap? Aaron D. Turner (Mar 19)
- Re: distributed nmap? D . R . Tzeck (Mar 21)
- Re: distributed nmap? Arturo Busleiman (Mar 18)
- Re: distributed nmap? Thomas Reinke (Mar 18)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: distributed nmap? Aaron D. Turner (Mar 19)
- Re: distributed nmap? Simple Nomad (Mar 24)