Re: [dev] Re: Simple port scanner again (was: GSoC 2010)

From: Uriel <lost.goblin_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 23:59:28 +0100

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Anselm R Garbe <anselm_AT_garbe.us> wrote:
> On 4 March 2010 12:33, anonymous <aim0shei_AT_lavabit.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 03:25:38PM -0600, eze.programmer_AT_gmail.com wrote:
>>> I think this is a good project idea, and it would prove more than useful
>>> also im looking forward to the simple port scanner, these project ideas
>>> have caugth my attention.
>>
>> I have already posted a thread about port scanner in this list. Here is
>> the code: http://bitbucket.org/noname/netscan/
>>
>> It can scan with TCP connect, raw TCP sockets and raw UDP sockets. There
>> is no delay/timeout calculation, default delay is 1 second (like ping),
>> obviously too high for most uses so it can be changed. Probably I should
>> write some README and improve man pages.
>>
>> It's biggest problem is pthreads. main() starts scanning thread and
>> outputs all scanned hosts until there is no hosts left. Then it waits
>> for second thread and exits. pthreads is bad, but I don't know what is
>> better.
>
> What about fork()? Nowadays hardware is so powerful ;) fork() results
> in nicer code ;)

Or rewrite in Go. In any case, using pthreads is plain *RETARDED*.

uriel
Received on Thu Mar 04 2010 - 22:59:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Mar 04 2010 - 23:12:02 UTC