This happend with me recently i use to scan through IPCscan and in this week i noticed that i am not able to get hit also not able to get the stuff going.. i think my ISP blocked the port 139 which the ips scan uses. but when i turned on my xscan i am able to scan normally polly scan uses sum other port lol but i want to know which port i can use so that my IPCscan still works.. Can Sum 1 help on this

uhhh...hm...dont make sense

1. i use to scan through IPCscan
2. i think my ISP blocked the port 139 which the ipcscan uses to crack winnt passes that is the reason my ipcscan is not showing any results..
3. but i found out that xscan still works for me.. but xscan is lil slow and also xscan uses many different port like " 1-139,443,445,1080,1433,2049,3128,3389,7000-7010,8010,8080,8181"
4. Since xscan is slow i wanted to use ipcscan which is faster but using different port so that my isp can't block or in other words i want to know which port xscan uses to scan for week nt

got it ??

i do believe they try to bf the passes through RPC which is 139...

tough luck :/ you could setup a tunnel from some inconspicuous port to 139...

if port 139 is closed for ipcscan itll be closed for xscan too, unless youre scanning for something other than ntpass with xscan in addition to 139

id also guess that you arent getting ntpass results because most people have protected themselves against it.

also, i could be wrong but i think some isps block certain 'hot' ports and services for a period to minimise attacks on their customers.

if you need to scan 139 do it on a scanstro, ill be surprised if you get any decent results though.

There are more ports than 139, you said it yourself that xscan uses many more ports than just 139.

I'm not sure but i think x-scan uses port 445 for Scanning Ntpw

xscan is too slow

scan with sfind or scan1000.exe and check them afterwards

scan500.exe or scan1000.exe
very cool scaner
x-scan seems slower

i usually scan with scan1000.exe for port 139 and check afterwards with NTscan very nice progam

Xscan is too slow but you maybe find some good results

I did some time ago an intensive testing of both, and I found the results of ntscan was very depending on the parameters I did set. With other words when I adjusted the parameters (less in paralell etc) and took the same dictionary I found more as it was fast.

Take some postivive results and rescan them with different parameters in ntscan and you will see what the beste params are for you.

LL