@[email protected] I'm sure @OJ probably has some kind of opinion about this... :grin:
I'm not a professional pentester, but my 2 cents would be that if your understanding of what msf is reduces down roughly to "a framework of exploits for delivering last year's CVEs", then you might be somewhat out of date with respect to your knowledge of msf's current capabilities (as well as how people are actually using it in the real world).
@0xbc @[email protected] use cases do vary. The question does appear to focus on the "exploit" part of toolsets such as MSF. I can honestly say that the number of "exploits" I use inside MSF consist of a very small set that hi ranking/low risk modules. The rest, for me, is all post exploitation: pivoting, routing, data exfil, etc.
So from a pure "exploit" point of view, agreed, no need for the complexity. But everything else you get is definitely worth it.
@[email protected] @0xbc It's important to think about your use case. I use MSF for attack simulations on companies that aren't that mature. That often includes "exploits" such as the recent Apache Struts, or Tomcat JMX invoker. They all "just work" nicely, and integrate well with all the other stuff I want to do. I use another tool for harder targets, and that tool is certainly not a monolithic framework.
MSF can easily be adjusted though, that's a strong point for sure.
@0xbc @[email protected] great question BTW :) Good to see such discussions happening here.
What are your thoughts?
Ben Cheney ❌
OJ 🧗