TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsubscribe issforum" in the body of your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for help with any problems! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Evans, Mark" wrote: > > The address are valid, but are impractical for scanning. A .255 is the > broadcast address for a particular network/subnet. You can't assign this to > a device. A .0 is the actual address of the network, as as such, can't be > "legally" assigned to a host/machine. You can if you're using classless addressing (CIDR). > From: Levinson, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > a range of IP addresses for the scanner to check it always omits two valid > addresses: xx.xx.xx.0 and xx.xx.xx.255 even though they are in the range > that I assign to the scan and are valid nodes on the network. Yikes. This is an ugly little secret. I'll have to confess my ignorance here because I had thought the scanner was identifying broadcast addresses when it did its pinging. The documentation for the pinger.exe file in the tools directory indicates that it identifies broadcast addresses...I would assume by the number of responses but who knows. I just did it from the command line and it identified a .255 CIDR addressed host here as a scannable address. However, when I tried selecting the host from the GUI, it didn't get scanned even though the host was shown in the GUI as being selected for scanning. A session log shows an empty host range list i.e. there is nothing between <Host-Range-List Keyfile="mykeyfile"> and </Host-Range-List> Nmap scans the host fine. ISS Version 6.21.2001.320 with XPress Updates through 7 -- Gary Flynn Security Engineer - Technical Services James Madison University Please R.U.N.S.A.F.E. http://www.jmu.edu/computing/runsafe
