Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
RustScan vs nmap vs masscan

Turns a 17 minutes Nmap scan into 19 seconds.
Find all open ports fast with Rustscan, automatically pipe them into Nmap.

Note: Version 1.1 runs in 8 seconds with batch size 10,000, version 1 runs in ~26 seconds on 1k threads, or average 1 – 2 minutes. I am updating the other package, but for maximum speed and latest support please use Cargo.


  • Scans all 65k ports in 8 seconds (on 10k batch size).
  • Saves you time by automatically piping it into Nmap. No more manual copying and pasting!
  • Does one thing and does it well. Only purpose is to improve Nmap, not replace it!
  • Let’s choose what Nmap commands to run, or uses the default.

Quote:Why RustScan?

Why spend time running fast scans and manually copying the ports, or waiting for a 20 minute scan to finish when you can just do all 65k ports in less than a minute?

[Image: result.gif]

RustScan running in 8 seconds and finding all open ports out of 65k.

Quote:RustScan vs Nmap vs MassScan

[Image: r1.png]

Quote:Increasing speed/accuracy

  • Batch size This increases speed, by allowing us to process more at once. Something experimental I am working on is changing the open file limit. You can do this manually with ulimit -n 70000 and then running rustscan with -B 65535. This should scan all 65535 ports at the exact same time. But this is extremely experimental.

For non-experimental speed increases, slowly increase the batch size until it no longer gets open ports, or it breaks.

  • Accuracy (and some speed) To increase accuracy, the easiest way is to increase the timeout. The default is 1.5 seconds, by setting it to 4 seconds (4000) we are telling RustScan “if we do not hear back from a port in 4 seconds, assume it is closed”.

Quote:Changelog v1.2.2

  • Uploading to AUR (properly, this time)
  • Docker build
  • More Debian installation methods
Quote:Join Us :

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)