masscan_as_a_service VS masscan

I use this approach for monitoring open ports in our infrastructure -- running masscan, commiting results to git repo. If there are changes, open the merge request for review. During the review, one would investigate the actual server, why there was change in open ports.

https://github.com/bobek/masscan_as_a_service

We typically use a variant of https://github.com/bobek/masscan_as_a_service

Massacan is awesome. One of the usecases is to periodically scan your own servers to see if you have not accidentally opened some new ports in firewalls.

https://github.com/bobek/masscan_as_a_service

Can I get banned for mass scanning with https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan or does it slow down any other vms from other persons?

Nope, this doesn't work any more. Shodan checks all ports (so any attackers using data from Shodan already know which ports you have open), and tools like masscan (https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan) let you portscan the entire IPv4 address space in less than 10 minutes.

https://github.com/LogoiLab/mcsl https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan

Changing the default port does nothing for security. It only prevents some basic brute force or default password scripts. Anyone is able to scan for it in no time anyway (https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan).

But it should blow away the far-too-common belief that no-one's after you because you're not interesting enough. IPv4 is smaller than we think. It is not difficult to scan the entire ipv4 space in minutes. And every single one of those is going to knock your door on the way past.

I'm not sure about the article, but the blazingly-fast IP scanner sounds a lot like Masscan. It can scan the entire Internet in 5 minutes and has received a lot of press: https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan . https://rushter.com/blog/how-masscan-works/ is one of many articles about it.

Here's an except from the masscan docs: