Kenneth Culver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Is anyone else seeing these problems? Is anyone working > on fixes? > > Ken
I just ran portupgrade -f nmap on this box: [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# uname -a FreeBSD tao.xtaz.co.uk 5.1-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.1-CURRENT #0: Sun Aug 24 13:35:21 BST 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/TAO i386 [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# gcc -v Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.3.1 [FreeBSD] [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# nmap -sS -O 192.168.1.10 Starting nmap 3.30 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2003-08-29 19:21 BST Interesting ports on neo.xtaz.co.uk (192.168.1.10): (The 1636 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed) Port State Service 21/tcp open ftp 22/tcp open ssh 23/tcp open telnet 111/tcp open sunrpc 113/tcp open auth 1023/tcp open netvenuechat 2049/tcp open nfs 6000/tcp open X11 Device type: general purpose Running (JUST GUESSING) : FreeBSD 5.X|4.X|2.X|3.X (97%), Amiga AmigaOS (92%), IBM AIX 5.X (90%), Apple Mac OS X 10.1.X (90%), Novell Netware 3.X|4.X|5.X (89%) Aggressive OS guesses: FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE (97%), FreeBSD 4.3 - 4.4-RELEASE (93%), FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE (X86) (93%), FreeBSD 5.1-CURRENT (June 2003) on Sparc64 (93%), AmigaOS Miami Deluxe 0.9 - Miami 3.2B (92%), AmigaOS 3.5/3.9 running Miami Deluxe 1.0c (92%), FreeBSD 2.2.1 - 4.1 (92%), FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE (92%), FreeBSD 4.7-STABLE (92%), IBM AIX 5.1 (90%) No exact OS matches for host (test conditions non-ideal). Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 31.448 seconds Seems ok to me? Incidently it probably can't guess the box is fbsd because I have tcp extensions turned off on it. -- email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - web: http://xtaz.co.uk/ Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
