Nmap Development mailing list archives

Problem Scanning local subnet range with -P0 option for version 3.90


From: "Jim Carras" <JFCECL () engr psu edu>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:15:19 -0400


   I have just upgraded to the latest version of nmap for windows
(3.90).  A command that worked with 3.81 does not work with 3.90.  The
command scans the local subnet using a range of hosts and the -P0
option.  The range specification with -P0 causes a nmap failure.  A
single local host machine can be scanned with -P0, as can a range of
machines for a subnet other than the local subnet of the scanning
system.

Ex. 
   Local scanning system has address 196.186.110.200 bitmask /24

   nmap -sV -p 22 -P0 196.168.110.10-11         -- fails with message
below

   nmap -sV -p 22 196.186.110.10-11             -- works


   MS Application Event Log entry for failure:

   Event ID:    1000
   Date:                9/8/2005
   Time:                9:54:58 AM
   User:                N/A
   Computer:    
   Description:
   Faulting application nmap.exe, version 3.0.0.1, faulting module
nmap.exe, version 3.0.0.1, fault address 0x0002e9ce.

   For more information, see Help and Support Center at
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
   Data:
   0000: 41 70 70 6c 69 63 61 74   Applicat
   0008: 69 6f 6e 20 46 61 69 6c   ion Fail
   0010: 75 72 65 20 20 6e 6d 61   ure  nma
   0018: 70 2e 65 78 65 20 33 2e   p.exe 3.
   0020: 30 2e 30 2e 31 20 69 6e   0.0.1 in
   0028: 20 6e 6d 61 70 2e 65 78    nmap.ex
   0030: 65 20 33 2e 30 2e 30 2e   e 3.0.0.
   0038: 31 20 61 74 20 6f 66 66   1 at off
   0040: 73 65 74 20 30 30 30 32   set 0002
   0048: 65 39 63 65 0d 0a         e9ce..  

   The size of the range does not matter, only the use of -P0 with the
range.
 
   The scanning system is running fully patched XP Professional Version
2002 Service Pack 2 and WinPcap 3.1beta4.  The command functions
properly with nmap 3.81.

   Thank you for your assistance.

Jim Carras

ECS - College of Engineering
Penn State University
jfc2 () psu edu

   


_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev


Current thread: