Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Exploit Repositories and Due Diligence |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:19:30 +0530 |
Good question! Personally, I feel exploit repositories only speed up the time it takes to identify whether an exploit exists or not. You'll invariably find that the exploit code itself gives insufficient information about the vulnerability in the comments, so you'll hit Securityfocus' or similar for more information. You *could* just get the exploit from there, but when you're in the middle of a test and you discover something not so standard (for example some random embedded device) you want to quickly look up whether an exploit exists. If you have testers that are just gcc'ing the exploit and firing it at a target without understanding the source, you're asking for trouble especially with respect to non-standard systems. What I have noticed is people relying too much on exploit repositories, they will identify a system, search the repository, and if they don't find a match, move on. This totally skips the creative process of approaching the system manually looking for 'common' problems -- broken authentication, default passwords etc. The way I like to work is ID the systems and their services, and make a table of exploits that I could tentatively use against each service. Then move to manual testing, if nothing comes out of that, pick an exploit, understand it, and if it passes the test, give it a shot. That said, updatable exploit repositories like SecurityForest (CVS based) are a godsend for managing your collection, and a great start for building one. Regards, Sahir Hidayatullah Technical Consultant - Information Security -------------------------------------- MIEL e-Security Pvt. Ltd. C- 611 / 612, Floral Deck Plaza, MIDC Central Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 093, India. Tel No:+ 91 (022) 2821 5050 PGP KeyID: 0x4F5EC345 Fingerprint: F4C2 7274 792E 8E39 D90D BA02 C070 B4BF 4F5E C345 -----Original Message----- From: Jeff [mailto:jb@jbware.net] Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 6:50 AM To: pen-test@securityfocus.com Subject: Exploit Repositories and Due Diligence I have a question regarding the use of exploit repositories (including projects like Metaploit, and compliations on bootable distros like Whoppix). With all of the large exploit repositories used to make pen testing faster and easier, what methods do you use to ensure you've done your due diligence in not unleashing something actually harmful on your clients? I have my own thoughts, such as googling and superficial|deep code reviews, but ultimately my concern is over the malcious hiding of intentions. Thanks for any insights and suggestions. - Jeff
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | A suggestion from the Moderator, Erin Carroll |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | AW: SQL injection, Julian Totzek |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Exploit Repositories and Due Diligence, Leandro Reox |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Exploit Repositories and Due Diligence, Carl Tucker |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |