Mailing List Archive

Move port selection from general options to target selection?
Hi,

I wonder whether it makes more sense for Nessus GTK Client
to have the port selection on the same page with the
target selection since the ports are also some
sort of targets.

Are there any objections agaibst moving the port selection
from the general options page to the target selection page?

Best

Jan
--
Jan-Oliver Wagner http://intevation.de/~jan/

Intevation GmbH http://intevation.de/
FreeGIS http://freegis.org/
Re: Move port selection from general options to target selection? [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 11:22:25AM +0100, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder whether it makes more sense for Nessus GTK Client
> to have the port selection on the same page with the
> target selection since the ports are also some
> sort of targets.


The ports are not some sort of targets. The port range changes the
behavior of the whole scan. They should stay close to the port scanners
and to the "consider unscanned port as closed" option.


-- Renaud
Re: Move port selection from general options to target selection? [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 03:40:45PM +0100, Renaud Deraison wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 11:22:25AM +0100, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
> > I wonder whether it makes more sense for Nessus GTK Client
> > to have the port selection on the same page with the
> > target selection since the ports are also some
> > sort of targets.
>
>
> The ports are not some sort of targets. The port range changes the
> behavior of the whole scan. They should stay close to the port scanners
> and to the "consider unscanned port as closed" option.

OK.
So, would it be a good idea to put all of these port-related options
into a page of their own: "Port selection" (right above "target
selection")?
I think they deserve a page of their own apart from the other "general"
options.

Jan
--
Jan-Oliver Wagner http://intevation.de/~jan/

Intevation GmbH http://intevation.de/
FreeGIS http://freegis.org/
Re: Move port selection from general options to target selection? [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 04:02:18PM +0100, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 03:40:45PM +0100, Renaud Deraison wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 11:22:25AM +0100, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
> > > I wonder whether it makes more sense for Nessus GTK Client
> > > to have the port selection on the same page with the
> > > target selection since the ports are also some
> > > sort of targets.
> >
> >
> > The ports are not some sort of targets. The port range changes the
> > behavior of the whole scan. They should stay close to the port scanners
> > and to the "consider unscanned port as closed" option.
>
> OK.
> So, would it be a good idea to put all of these port-related options
> into a page of their own: "Port selection" (right above "target
> selection")?
> I think they deserve a page of their own apart from the other "general"
> options.

there seems to be no veto :-), so I will go for it as proposed ...

Best

Jan
--
Jan-Oliver Wagner http://intevation.de/~jan/

Intevation GmbH http://intevation.de/
FreeGIS http://freegis.org/
Re: Move port selection from general options to target selection? [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 12:56:38AM +0100, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
> there seems to be no veto :-), so I will go for it as proposed ...

I've been slow on this. I'm opposed to it, as the more "pages" you
create, the more complex Nessus seems to be. I'd hate to have to click
through a couple of pages in Nessus 2.4.x to see which settings are set,
whereas I'd see everything in Nessus 2.2.x.

So the port range should stay in the "scan option" with the port
scanners.


-- Renaud
Re: Move port selection from general options to target selection? [ In reply to ]
On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 11:48:01AM +0100, Renaud Deraison wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 12:56:38AM +0100, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
> > there seems to be no veto :-), so I will go for it as proposed ...
>
> I've been slow on this. I'm opposed to it, as the more "pages" you
> create, the more complex Nessus seems to be. I'd hate to have to click
> through a couple of pages in Nessus 2.4.x to see which settings are set,
> whereas I'd see everything in Nessus 2.2.x.
>
> So the port range should stay in the "scan option" with the port
> scanners.

OK, I'll leave it at it is.

Jan

--
Jan-Oliver Wagner http://intevation.de/~jan/

Intevation GmbH http://intevation.de/
FreeGIS http://freegis.org/