Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: SoC: port state reasons
From: Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:51:12 -0700
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 10:45:18PM +0200, Eddie Bell wrote:
On 10/06/06, Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org> wrote:Agreed, the ttl output combined with reasons and IP addresses overwhelms the output.
Yeah, I can see that. How about only printing "from <IP>" when IP is != the target IP?
I tend to think that we should probably print thereason information to the XML output even if --reason wasn't specified, as it shouldn't take much more computation or inflate the filesize dramatically.Thats good because a lot of the reason code assignments are not worth doing conditionally, so get executed even if --reason is not specified
Makes sense. Though we should probably ensure that all or none of the reason codes are conditional. We don't want to print partial results, even to XML output. Cheers, -F _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Current thread:
- SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 07)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman (Jun 07)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 09)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Martin Mačok (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Eddie Bell (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)
- Re: SoC: port state reasons Fyodor (Jun 10)