doscan: Oddly enough, I get nothing

In this business, if a program gives me nothing at all as its output, it means one of two things.

2013-10-16-4dkln41-doscan

First, and the less likely of the two, it just doesn’t work. I’ve run into more than one of those in the D section; I’ll list them out for you in a day or two.

Second, and probably the problem in 90 percent of cases, I’m using it wrong, and being a dunderhead.

That’s probably what’s happening in the screenshot above. That’s the Debian version of doscan, which by all rights should list machines on my local network listening for a TCP connection.

I used the address above as a sort of generic network that I don’t mind sharing on the Internet, and of course as you can see, nothing comes about of it. Not even an error message.

But it’s the same for my actual network address. And if I try a wider, building-wide network? Nothing. What’s worse, the two commands there are straight from the man page as examples.

And yet, I see nothing as output. I assume that a null response yields nothing, but I also wonder if maybe something in doscan’s guts has gone sour, and all it will ever report is a blank line. 😦

It could be the case. Like I said, that was the Debian version. There is no version in Arch or AUR, and my attempts to build it from scratch resulted in make errors.

That does make me a little suspicious, not just because the last update listed at the home page was in 2003. Like I’ve said, 10 years is not a huge issue for Linux software, but it does make me look askance.

I open this one to the general public. If you can get doscan working and displaying some sort of output, please share. I am left wondering why, oddly, I get nothing. 😐

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “doscan: Oddly enough, I get nothing

  1. Zio

    Try using the -E -v flags. I think you need -v to show the errors ( -.- ) …

    $ doscan -E -v –banner 500 –port 80 192.168.1.0/24
    doscan: about to scan 192.168.1.0/24
    2013-10-16 14:48:02.688 192.168.1.1 HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request\r\nServer: micro_httpd\r\nCach .. .. .. etc..

    Bye!

    1. K.Mandla Post author

      That … may have been the trick. I got a start message and then it quickly ended, which suggests to me that there was nothing to report. Thanks for the nudge! 🙂

  2. Pingback: echoping: Another gray area | Inconsolation

Comments are closed.