Nmap Development: Re: UDP scanning

[Hari Sekhon <hpsekhon () googlemail com>]

"nmap -sU -sV -p U:137,138 hostname" yields


Starting Nmap 4.11 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2007-01-11 20:02 GMT
Interesting ports on host.mydomain.com (ip.add.r.e.ss):
PORT    STATE         SERVICE     VERSION
137/udp open          netbios-ns  Microsoft Windows netbios-ssn 
(workgroup: MYDOMAIN)
138/udp open|filtered netbios-dgm
MAC Address: 00:13:72:2E:1C:B1 (Dell)
Service Info: OS: Windows

Nmap finished: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 51.395 seconds



So I guess it works ok. I can't tell on the 138 port whether it really 
is open or filtered, there must have been no response on that port.


Thanks


-h

Hari Sekhon



Hans Nilsson wrote:
> Well since, like you mention, UDP ports don't typically respond to
> packets it's probably difficult. All I can think of is also trying a
> version scan and seeing if you can provoke a response from the port in
> question.
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:51:24 +0000, "Hari Sekhon"
> <hpsekhon () googlemail com> said:
>   
> > I'm trying to scan for the accessibility of the udp ports 137 and 138 
> > but am not sure about this. Given that udp is connectionless and doesn't 
> > have to respond, is it even possible that I can use nmap to see if those 
> > two ports are accessible. I know the host is up, host discovery by icmp 
> > bounce is not what I am interested in here, just verification of whether 
> > the udp ports are accessible through the firewall.
> >
> >
> > Thanks for any feedback.
> >
> > -- 
> > Hari Sekhon
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
> > http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
> > Archived at http://SecLists.Org
> >     
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://SecLists.Org