Pros of PowerSploit

• More comprehensive toolkit with a wider range of post-exploitation modules
• Actively maintained with regular updates and contributions from the community
• Includes advanced features like privilege escalation and persistence mechanisms

Cons of PowerSploit

• Larger codebase, which may be more complex to navigate and use
• Higher likelihood of detection by antivirus software due to its popularity
• Requires more setup and configuration for specific tasks

Code Comparison

SessionGopher:

function Invoke-SessionGopher {
    [CmdletBinding()]
    param (
        [switch]$Thorough,
        [switch]$Quiet
    )

PowerSploit:

function Invoke-Mimikatz {
    [Diagnostics.CodeAnalysis.SuppressMessageAttribute('PSShouldProcess', '')]
    [CmdletBinding(DefaultParameterSetName = 'DumpCreds')]
    Param(
        [Parameter(Position = 0, ParameterSetName = 'DumpCreds')]
        [Switch]
        $DumpCreds
    )

Both repositories provide PowerShell-based tools for post-exploitation activities. SessionGopher focuses specifically on extracting saved session information, while PowerSploit offers a broader range of functionalities. PowerSploit's code tends to be more complex due to its wider scope, as seen in the example above.

Pros of Empire

• More comprehensive post-exploitation framework with extensive capabilities
• Active development and community support
• Modular architecture allowing for easy extension and customization

Cons of Empire

• Larger footprint and potentially more detectable
• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• Requires more setup and configuration

Code Comparison

SessionGopher (PowerShell):

function Invoke-SessionGopher {
    [CmdletBinding()]
    param(
        [switch]$Thorough,
        [switch]$Recon,
        [string]$Target,
        [switch]$AllDomain,
        [string]$OutputDirectory
    )
    # ... (implementation details)
}

Empire (Python):

class Stager:
    def __init__(self, mainMenu, params=[]):
        self.info = {
            'Name': 'DuckyLauncher',
            'Author': ['@harmj0y', '@midnite_runr'],
            'Description': ('Generates a ducky script that launches'),
            'Comments': ['']
        }
        # ... (additional setup)

SessionGopher is a focused PowerShell tool for extracting saved session information, while Empire is a more extensive post-exploitation framework written primarily in Python. SessionGopher is simpler to use for its specific purpose, while Empire offers a broader range of capabilities but with increased complexity.

Pros of BloodHound

• More comprehensive Active Directory attack path analysis
• Graphical interface for visualizing attack paths
• Actively maintained with regular updates

Cons of BloodHound

• Requires more setup and infrastructure
• Steeper learning curve for new users
• Potentially more resource-intensive

Code Comparison

SessionGopher (PowerShell):

function Invoke-SessionGopher {
    [CmdletBinding()]
    param(
        [Switch]$Thorough,
        [Switch]$Stealth
    )

BloodHound (JavaScript):

function startBloodHound() {
    const electron = require('electron');
    const app = electron.app;
    const BrowserWindow = electron.BrowserWindow;
    const path = require('path');

SessionGopher focuses on extracting session and credential information from Windows systems using PowerShell, while BloodHound is a more complex tool for mapping and analyzing Active Directory environments using a combination of PowerShell data collection and a JavaScript-based interface. BloodHound offers more extensive capabilities for identifying attack paths in AD environments, but SessionGopher is simpler to use for quick credential harvesting tasks.

Pros of Mimikatz

• More comprehensive functionality for credential extraction and manipulation
• Supports a wider range of Windows versions and authentication mechanisms
• Actively maintained with frequent updates and improvements

Cons of Mimikatz

• Larger footprint and more complex to use
• Highly detected by antivirus software due to its popularity
• Requires administrative privileges for most operations

Code Comparison

SessionGopher (PowerShell):

function Invoke-SessionGopher {
    [CmdletBinding()]
    param(
        [switch]$Thorough,
        [switch]$Quiet
    )
    # ... (implementation)
}

Mimikatz (C):

BOOL APIENTRY DllMain(HMODULE hModule, DWORD ul_reason_for_call, LPVOID lpReserved)
{
    switch (ul_reason_for_call)
    {
        case DLL_PROCESS_ATTACH:
        case DLL_THREAD_ATTACH:
        case DLL_THREAD_DETACH:
        case DLL_PROCESS_DETACH:
            break;
    }
    return TRUE;
}

SessionGopher is a PowerShell-based tool focused on extracting saved session information, while Mimikatz is a more comprehensive C-based tool for various credential extraction and manipulation tasks. SessionGopher is lighter and less detected but has more limited functionality compared to Mimikatz.

Pros of LaZagne

• Multi-platform support (Windows, Linux, macOS)
• Broader scope of credential retrieval (browsers, email clients, databases, etc.)
• Active development and regular updates

Cons of LaZagne

• More complex to use and configure
• Potentially higher false positive rate
• Larger codebase, which may impact performance on resource-constrained systems

Code Comparison

LaZagne (Python):

def run_lazagne(category_selected="all", subcategories={}, password=None):
    for category in category_selected:
        for r in runModule(category):
            yield r

SessionGopher (PowerShell):

function Invoke-SessionGopher {
    [CmdletBinding()]
    param (
        [Switch]$Thorough,
        [Switch]$Quiet
    )

LaZagne offers a more flexible approach with category selection and subcategories, while SessionGopher focuses on specific Windows-related credentials with simpler parameters.

Summary

LaZagne provides a comprehensive, multi-platform solution for credential retrieval, supporting various applications and services. It offers more flexibility but requires more setup and may produce more false positives. SessionGopher, on the other hand, is tailored for Windows environments, focusing on specific credential types with a simpler interface. The choice between the two depends on the target environment and the breadth of credential retrieval required.

Pros of PEASS-ng

• Comprehensive privilege escalation toolkit for multiple operating systems (Windows, Linux, macOS)
• Actively maintained with frequent updates and contributions
• Includes both automated scanning and manual techniques for thorough assessments

Cons of PEASS-ng

• Larger codebase and more complex to use compared to SessionGopher
• May generate more noise and false positives due to its comprehensive nature
• Requires more setup and configuration for optimal use

Code Comparison

SessionGopher (PowerShell):

function Get-PuTTYSessions {
    $regPath = "Registry::HKEY_USERS\*\Software\SimonTatham\PuTTY\Sessions"
    Get-ChildItem $regPath | ForEach-Object {
        $_.Name
    }
}

PEASS-ng (Bash):

function check_sudo_commands {
    echo "====== Checking Sudo Commands ======"
    sudo -l 2>/dev/null | grep -v "may run the following commands" | sed "s/^/\t/"
    echo ""
}

Both tools focus on privilege escalation and information gathering, but PEASS-ng offers a more comprehensive approach across multiple platforms, while SessionGopher specializes in Windows session data extraction. PEASS-ng's broader scope makes it more versatile but potentially more complex to use effectively.