On Wed Sep 20 2006 at 18:33, Douglas Nordwall wrote:

> Well, for me, the sheer configurability of it is the best part. Speed
> isn't always what you are after, and just this morning, speed was the
> enemy. We had a box that had countermeasures on it, and we had to
> move slow to not trigger them. I didn't see an option for this on the
> built in scanner.

safe_checks && max_checks=1 gives the lowest speed.
(! safe_checks) && max_checks>=5 gives the highest speed.

> I also like the ability to control port scan randomization

We may introduce some trick against *basic* portscan detection, but 
probably not randomization, because it might lead to erratic
problems. 

> and very fine grained control of the timing.

Fine grained control is the enemy of adaptability. Maybe I did not
find a single box with anti-portscan countermeasures, but I scanned
many boxes on unreliable links or loaded networks. In such cases, the
scanner has to slow down when it starts losing packets, and speed up
later. nessus_tcp_scanner does this rather well; in fact much better
than any other port scanner I tried.

> Part of it, I imagine is because we really like nmap and there is a
> mental "this is the best port scanner

This sounds more like marketing than technique to me.
Anyway, I do not see where the problem is.
nmap.nasl has always been available, and the import function works
fine and does not need to be updated everytime a new option pops
up. Running Nmap from inside Nessus is definitely a bad idea, for
reasons that are written on the web site.

-- 
http://arboi.da.ru/                     http://ma75.blogspot.com/
PGP key ID : 0x0BBABA91 - 0x1320924F0BBABA91
Fingerprint: 1048 B09B EEAF 20AA F645  2E1A 1320 924F 0BBA BA91
_______________________________________________
Nessus mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus

Reply via email to