Re: SinFP 2.06, new signatures, benchmark results

[Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 01:19:52PM +0100, GomoR wrote:
> Also, two benchmarks versus Nmap have been done:
> http://www.phocean.net/index.php/post/2006/12/17/SinFP
> http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=173

Independent benchmark results can be useful, but I'm afraid that those
two are rather poor.  The first one uses Nmap 4.10 (first generation
OS detection, released in June) rather than 4.20 with 2nd gen OS
detection.  The second one uses --osscan-guess on Nmap 4.03 and the
equivalent option (-H) on SinFP.  Then he _doesn't_ include that
option in the 4.20 results.  So it makes Nmap 4.03 look better than
4.20, just because he used more appropriate command-line flags for
4.03.

Cheers,
-F

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