Yes, I did get the Filtered responce and your explanation makes cense to me,
somewhat..
Well at least I feel a little better About those scans.. and about Nmap, and
about iptables..
I wish to thank this group/list, Good Job..
Chris N.
>>
>>UDP scans are not very reliable. If the port is open, no
>>packet is returned,
>>and if the port is closed, an icmp port unreachable is
>>returned. However, if
>>the replies are blocked or lost, you'll have false positives.
>>
>>> nmap -sU -p0 -p 100-139 HOST-IP
>>>
>>> I got a no ports open.
>>
>>nmap only notes the ports that are in a different state than
>>the rest when you
>>scan large numbers, to avoid giving you a flood of identical
>>information.
>>
>>You probably had a line like this in the output:
>>
>>All 40 scanned ports on 1.2.3.4 are: filtered
>>
>>For a UDP scan, there's no way to distinguish between "open"
>>and "filtered".
>>nmap makes some assumptions based on the number of ports
>>scanned, but it's
>>really only a guess. Therefore, this result is really the
>>same as your
>>previous result.
>>
>>This is no bug in nmap, though maybe it's a shortcoming in
>>the documentation.
>>Maybe there should be a note, something like "if you see no
>>closed ports in a
>>UDP scan, the host may be firewalled or down, and the results are not
>>reliable."
>>
>>--
>>Scottie Shore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> "Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize
>> a mistake when you make it again." -- F. P. Jones
>>
