Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

TCP options interface for nping #213

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

ddrown
Copy link

@ddrown ddrown commented Sep 18, 2015

adds the following options to the TCP probe mode of nping:

--tcp-options                   : Include hardcoded TCP Options in packet
--tcp-options-raw <hexstring>   : Use the given hex string as the TCP Options
--tcp-ts                        : Include a timestamp value in the TCP Options
--ts-increment                  : Increment the timestamp value in the TCP Options

@dmiller-nmap
Copy link

This is a good improvement to Nping's packet crafting capability, but I'm not sure I agree with a few things:

  • having a hardcoded default that is not documented
  • Having separate options for "default" vs "raw"

I would like to see this split into a few different changes that each offer an incremental improvement. Then we can evaluate each separately and merge them faster:

  1. A --tcp-options option that works just like your --tcp-options-raw in this PR. This matches the naming scheme used by --ip-options.
  2. Enhance the --tcp-options to take a symbolic representation like --ip-options does. We have something like this in Nmap's OS detection where we use single non-hexdigit alpha letters to indicate the option, then append a hex value to each. So your default options would be encoded as "M5B4NNSNW7". You'd have to add a new syntax for timestamp, maybe separating the TSval from the TSecr by a colon (":").
  3. Add the --ts-increment option. If the --tcp-options specified by the user does not contain the TS option, it would be appended to the end of the options and padded with noops as necessary.

@ddrown ddrown closed this Jun 6, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants