The problem was eventually sorted out. Just to keep everyone posted. It is
the NETWORK issue. In the configuration file of IPsec tunnel, the source ip
was left over. Thanks a lot for the help!

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Eero Volotinen <[email protected]>
wrote:

> What is output of nmap -P0 -p- ip in both scenarios?
>
> Eero
> 24.11.2015 8.29 ip. "Tianyi Yang" <[email protected]> kirjoitti:
>
>> I did set the target as 'consider alive', but it still didn't scan the
>> host on the other side of the tunnel.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Eero Volotinen <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> as I said before, you need to set target alive test to 'consider alive'
>>> (this is feature of openvas 8) or modify scan config to remove ping alive
>>> test.
>>>
>>> Eero
>>>
>>> 2015-11-24 19:52 GMT+02:00 Tianyi Yang <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>> I ran nmap in the terminal using all kinds of discovery methods that I
>>>> know, e.g. SYN ping, ACK ping, UDP ping and ICMP ping, the probed host was
>>>> shown as dead for each of these.
>>>>
>>>> However, when simply run "ping host-ip" (which is basically ICMP
>>>> probe), it worked fine.
>>>>
>>>> So I am wondering if bad configuration of nmap caused all the problems?
>>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>>
>>>> TY
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Eero Volotinen <[email protected]
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You should use following nmap settings with root account (on openvas
>>>>> machine)
>>>>>
>>>>> nmap -P0 -p- ip.address
>>>>>
>>>>> that mean -P0 = consider host alive, -p- = full tcp scan  ..
>>>>>
>>>>> and same with vpn connection. if results are different on nmap scan
>>>>> then problem is not on openvas machine. Then it's related to your network
>>>>> configuration, firewall settings or routing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eero
>>>>>
>>>>> 2015-11-24 19:26 GMT+02:00 Tianyi Yang <[email protected]>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for the good suggestions!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. I tested setting target as consider alive, full tcp scan and full
>>>>>> and fast and tried again to scan over VPN, the results are exactly the 
>>>>>> same
>>>>>> as before and no improvement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. I tried probing the target host with nmap over VPN, it showed "0
>>>>>> hosts up". So nmap showed the same unwanted results as openvas. Any
>>>>>> suggestions on how to make changes? Thanks a lot!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:57 AM, Eero Volotinen <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's really hard to guess all your settings and configurations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> please set target to consider alive, full tcp scan and full and fast
>>>>>>> and try again. you should also try scan same target using nmap and 
>>>>>>> compare
>>>>>>> results.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Eero
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2015-11-23 19:59 GMT+02:00 Tianyi Yang <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was scanning a same device over VPN and through direct connect
>>>>>>>> with exactly the same configurations, and found the results are 
>>>>>>>> essentially
>>>>>>>> different.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The results over VPN only catch 5 Logs in the following, i.e.
>>>>>>>> 3com switch2hub (general/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> OS fingerprinting (general/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> ICMP Timestamp Detection (general/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> Traceroute (general/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> CPE Inventory (general/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, in the results when connect directly between the scanned
>>>>>>>> device and the scanner host, 2 High and 11 Logs are found. In addition 
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> those listed above, there are:
>>>>>>>> Multiple NetGear ProSafe Switches Information Disclosure
>>>>>>>> Vulnerability (80/tcp) (High)
>>>>>>>> Report default community names of the SNMP Agent (161 tcp) (High)
>>>>>>>> HTTP Server type and version (80/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> Services (80/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> Web mirroring (80/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> Directory Scanner (80/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> wapiti (NASL wrapper) (80/tcp) (Log)
>>>>>>>> An SNMP Agent is running (161/udp) (Log)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We see that the job over VPN has only results in locations
>>>>>>>> "general/tcp". And I further found that the VPN results were 
>>>>>>>> independent of
>>>>>>>> the port list, which means even if we specifies an EMPTY port list, the
>>>>>>>> outcome is exactly the same. And I read the logs on the scanned device 
>>>>>>>> site
>>>>>>>> and found only ports, e.g. TCP 22 and UDP 69 were probed. However, the
>>>>>>>> requested ports like TCP 80 and UDP 161 were never probed over VPN.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does anyone have insights what's wrong with my scan
>>>>>>>> jobs/setup/configs over VPN? I appreciate it!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TY
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Openvas-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Openvas-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-discuss

Reply via email to