Issue: Aperture Discovery Targets may be modified or moved after saving.

Applies to

This has only been tested and documented in 18.4, but may apply to previous or future versions.


If you save a discovery job with a list of IP addresses for targets, and a specified port or ports, after saving, you may find your list adjusted (the order of entries, and parts of it changed.


The Aperture interface attempts to perform an intelligent discovery, and accordingly also tries to correct or simplify the entries  you've added. Sometimes, this intelligence may make slight changes to what you initially input. A careful check will generally show that what you initially put in is still being done, but just looks a little different.

Explanation of the Issue / What happens.

The engine is trying to simplify entries intelligently. For instance, if you specified 4 computers to scan port 443, and specified port 443 in the port window, the interface might remove the specified ports from the port scan.  Or, if you specified to scan ports 80, 443 in ports, and had a list of computers, some of which included 80 and/or 443, the interface might pull out just those and leave the rest.

Finally, in some cases, you may specify one computer to scan 443, another to scan 80, and a third may have no port specified (which tells the interface to use the port in the "Port" screen.  If the port window has 680 in it, you might find ports to read 443, the computer with 443 shows nothing, and the computer with nothing has 680. The net effect is the same. Sometimes, when this happens, the order of the IP addresses listed may change.

In case of error

First, please try to find a more concise and specific way to present your list to the application in order to reduce problems with the intelligence programmed into the feature.

And please report any behavior outside of these parameters, specifically, where the changes do NOT reflect what you want, to support.

Finally, if you simply don't like how this feature works or find it confusing, please submit your thoughts at

Was this article helpful?
0 out of 0 found this helpful