On May 10, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Robert Spier wrote: > What about the non-TcpServer based engines? i.e. Apache, async, etc.
As I'm unfamiliar with them, the best I could do is add some comments in there stating that someone who knows how those other engines work should add the code, and if they don't, and p0f doesn't work, they shouldn't be surprised. > (Ok, async probably isn't an issue since p0f wouldn't work well with > it anyway.) > > I can probably be convinced to apply this anyway, but I'm trying to > keep compatibility where we can. I had thought of that, but there's several different options there, and odds are good they won't all work the same way. Perhaps those other methods needs to have a dedicated sub (for each one) that knows how to fetch those variables. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to add a TODO note in the p0f plugin as well, noting that when using those engines, some of the required variables might be missing and need someone to code support for them. In any case, p0f support can work with my patch, and it didn't work for me without it. Matt
