RE: Port Exclusion option?

[Mike Santillana <msantillana () gdssecurity com>]

If I manually put in ports (like for a full port scan), for example -p0-
will the ~/.nmap file prevent port, let's say 80 and 443, from being
scanned?


-----Original Message-----
From: nmap-dev-bounces () insecure org [mailto:nmap-dev-bounces () insecure org]
On Behalf Of Dewhirst, Rob
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 11:30 AM
To: nmap-dev () insecure org
Subject: Re: Port Exclusion option?

This works for me.

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:51:59AM -0600, Dewhirst, Rob wrote:
> > I was waiting for someone else to speak up, but since you asked, yes I
> > would really like this.
> >
> > For normal scans the built-in default 1000 ports are fine, but in that
> > list is a couple ports that generate erroneous results in our
> > environment.  The byproduct is nmap thinks every IP address has a host
> > behind it. (it's our environment, not nmap causing this issue)
> >
> > I would prefer to just exclude one or two ports from the default
> > rather than specify a range around them.
>
> One option is to copy the nmap-services file to ~/.nmap and set the
> popularity value to 0 for the ports you don't want scanned by default.
> Nmap (on UNIX) will then give the file priority over the system
> installed one.  Or you can specify the custom services file (on any
> OS) using the --servicedb flag.
>
> Cheers,
> Fyodor
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/