Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:16:18 -0500 (EST)
From:      Dru <dlavigne6@cogeco.ca>
To:        jason <jason@monsterjam.org>
Cc:        questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: VERY annoying nmap problem.
Message-ID:  <20030329101058.V17599@dhcp-17-14.kico2.on.cogeco.ca>
In-Reply-To: <20030329073128.M33245-100000@monsterjam.org>
References:  <20030329073128.M33245-100000@monsterjam.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, jason wrote:

> This has been going on since version 3.0 of nmap for freebsd..
>
> su-2.05b# uname -a
> FreeBSD monsterjam.org 4.8-RC FreeBSD 4.8-RC #0: Mon Mar 10 16:54:44
>
> su-2.05b# nmap -sU 10.1.1.10
>
> Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
> sendto in send_udp_raw: sendto(3, packet, 28, 0, 10.1.1.10, 16) =>
> Permission denied
> Sleeping 15 seconds then retrying
> ^Ccaught SIGINT signal, cleaning up
> su-2.05b#
>
> this is nmap installed from the ports. I have tried it from source and get
> the same thing. regular port scans work though
>
> su-2.05b# nmap  10.1.1.10
>
> Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
> Interesting ports on bush (10.1.1.10):
> (The 1595 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed)
> Port       State       Service
> 22/tcp     open        ssh
> 111/tcp    open        sunrpc
> 139/tcp    open        netbios-ssn
> 631/tcp    open        ipp
> 6000/tcp   open        X11
> 32771/tcp  open        sometimes-rpc5
>
> Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1 second
> su-2.05b#
>
> I emailed fydor a few times and got no help.
> anyone have any ideas? This used to work fine before 3.0


What firewall are you using and what rules have you created for UDP?
Using -sU (UDP scan) sends UDP packets. Whereas not specifying a switch
assumes a full connect scan which uses TCP.

Dru



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030329101058.V17599>