Re: Enhanced Version of HTTPtrace.nse

[Kris Katterjohn <katterjohn () gmail com>]

Rob Nicholls wrote:
> Evening,
>
> Up until now, I'd assumed that the HTTPtrace script was used to detect
> (and I don't mean relying on what OPTIONS * says) servers that supported
> TRACE requests (which is bad practice). But I was tesing the script today
> against a server that I knew had it enabled, and it didn't say anything.
> So I've added support to Kris' script to try and return fairly accurately
> information about whether TRACE is or isn't enabled (or inconclusive
> IMHO), based on the behaviour that I remember seeing on servers in the
> past. I think the logic is correct (see comments in the code for why I'm
> doing what I'm doing, any further suggestions would be appreciated), but I
> haven't been able to test all the scenarios yet as I only started working
> on it earlier today.

Hi Rob!

Printing that it is enabled but nothing changed is something that I 
would consider if -v or -d is set (nmap.verbosity or nmap.debugging) 
since that is something that can be useful at times.  However, printing 
that it's not enabled is too much output IMO, and I'm pretty sure Fyodor 
will agree.

I hate that you wrote all that up with great comments only for me to say 
this, but I just don't think there's a good reason to say that it's not 
enabled.  But I've been wrong plenty of times before!

Comments? :)

Thanks,
Kris Katterjohn

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