PowerUpSQL

Pros of sqlmap

• More comprehensive database support, covering a wide range of DBMS systems
• Extensive feature set for automated SQL injection and database takeover
• Active development with frequent updates and a large community

Cons of sqlmap

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity and numerous options
• Can be overkill for simple SQL injection tasks or specific Microsoft SQL Server scenarios

Code Comparison

sqlmap:

def getFingerprint(self):
    value = ""
    wsOsFp = Format.getOs("web server", kb.headersFp)
    if wsOsFp:
        value += "%s\n" % wsOsFp
    return value

PowerUpSQL:

function Get-SQLInstanceDomain
{
    [CmdletBinding()]
    Param(
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'Domain to search for SQL Servers.')]
        [string]$Domain,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'Suppress verbose errors.  Used when function is wrapped.')]
        [switch]$SuppressVerbose
    )

Summary

sqlmap is a more versatile and feature-rich tool for SQL injection across various database systems, while PowerUpSQL focuses specifically on Microsoft SQL Server and offers PowerShell integration. sqlmap may be preferred for complex scenarios and diverse database environments, whereas PowerUpSQL excels in Windows environments and for targeted Microsoft SQL Server testing.

Pros of TruffleHog

• Language-agnostic, supporting multiple programming languages and file types
• Utilizes regex patterns and entropy for more comprehensive secret detection
• Actively maintained with frequent updates and community contributions

Cons of TruffleHog

• May produce more false positives due to its broad detection approach
• Requires additional setup and configuration for optimal results
• Less focused on SQL-specific vulnerabilities and attack vectors

Code Comparison

TruffleHog (Python):

def find_strings(blob, custom_regexes={}):
    strings_found = []
    for key in regexes:
        found = re.findall(regexes[key], blob)
        for string in found:
            strings_found.append((key, string))
    return strings_found

PowerUpSQL (PowerShell):

function Get-SQLConnectionObject
{
    [CmdletBinding()]
    Param(
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server or domain name.')]
        [string]$Instance,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server login username.')]
        [string]$Username,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server login password.')]
        [string]$Password
    )
    # Function implementation...
}

Pros of PayloadsAllTheThings

• Covers a wider range of security topics and attack vectors
• Regularly updated with new payloads and techniques
• Provides a comprehensive resource for various penetration testing scenarios

Cons of PayloadsAllTheThings

• Less focused on SQL-specific attacks and techniques
• May require more time to find relevant SQL payloads among other content
• Not specifically designed for PowerShell integration

Code Comparison

PowerUpSQL:

Get-SQLInstanceDomain | Get-SQLConnectionTest | Where-Object {$_.Status -eq "Accessible"} | Get-SQLServerInfo

PayloadsAllTheThings (SQL Injection example):

UNION SELECT NULL,NULL,NULL,NULL,NULL,NULL,NULL,NULL,NULL,NULL--

PowerUpSQL is specifically designed for SQL Server enumeration and exploitation using PowerShell, while PayloadsAllTheThings provides a broader range of payloads for various security testing scenarios. PowerUpSQL offers more specialized SQL-related functions, whereas PayloadsAllTheThings serves as a general reference for multiple attack vectors, including SQL injection.

Pros of SecLists

• Comprehensive collection of multiple types of lists for various security testing scenarios
• Regularly updated with community contributions
• Useful for a wide range of security testing activities beyond just SQL-related tasks

Cons of SecLists

• Not specifically focused on SQL or database security
• Requires more manual effort to utilize in specific testing scenarios
• May contain outdated or less relevant entries due to its broad scope

Code Comparison

While a direct code comparison isn't applicable due to the nature of these repositories, here's a brief example of how they might be used:

SecLists:

# Using SecLists for password cracking
john --wordlist=/path/to/SecLists/Passwords/Common-Credentials/10-million-password-list-top-1000000.txt target_hashes.txt

PowerUpSQL:

# Using PowerUpSQL for SQL Server discovery
Import-Module PowerUpSQL
Get-SQLInstanceDomain | Get-SQLServerInfo -Verbose

PowerUpSQL is specifically designed for SQL Server security assessment and exploitation, while SecLists provides general-purpose wordlists and patterns for various security testing scenarios.

Pros of Metasploit-Framework

• Broader scope: Covers a wide range of security testing and exploitation techniques
• Larger community: More contributors and extensive documentation
• Multi-platform support: Works on various operating systems

Cons of Metasploit-Framework

• Steeper learning curve: More complex to use for beginners
• Resource-intensive: Requires more system resources to run effectively
• Less focused on SQL-specific tasks: Not specialized for SQL server attacks

Code Comparison

PowerUpSQL (PowerShell):

Get-SQLInstanceDomain | Get-SQLConnectionTest | Where-Object {$_.Status -eq "Accessible"} | Get-SQLServerInfo

Metasploit-Framework (Ruby):

use auxiliary/scanner/mssql/mssql_ping
set RHOSTS 192.168.1.0/24
run

PowerUpSQL focuses on SQL-specific tasks with PowerShell, while Metasploit-Framework offers a broader range of security testing capabilities using Ruby. PowerUpSQL's code is more concise for SQL-related operations, whereas Metasploit-Framework requires additional setup but provides more versatility for various security testing scenarios.

Pros of PowerSploit

• Broader scope: Covers a wide range of post-exploitation tasks beyond SQL Server
• More mature project: Longer development history and larger community
• Extensive documentation and usage examples

Cons of PowerSploit

• Less focused on SQL Server specific tasks
• Not actively maintained (last commit in 2018)
• Larger codebase may be overwhelming for specific SQL Server tasks

Code Comparison

PowerSploit (Get-SQLServerLoginDefaultPw):

function Get-SQLServerLoginDefaultPw
{
    [CmdletBinding()]
    Param(
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server or domain account to authenticate with.')]
        [string]$Username,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server or domain account password to authenticate with.')]
        [string]$Password,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'Windows credentials.')]
        [System.Management.Automation.PSCredential]
        [System.Management.Automation.Credential()]$Credential = [System.Management.Automation.PSCredential]::Empty
    )

PowerUpSQL (Get-SQLServerLoginDefaultPw):

function Get-SQLServerLoginDefaultPw
{
    [CmdletBinding()]
    Param(
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        ValueFromPipelineByPropertyName = $true,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server instance to connection to.')]
        [string]$Instance,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server or domain account to authenticate with.')]
        [string]$Username,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'SQL Server or domain account password to authenticate with.')]
        [string]$Password,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'Windows credentials.')]
        [System.Management.Automation.PSCredential]
        [System.Management.Automation.Credential()]$Credential = [System.Management.Automation.PSCredential]::Empty,
        [Parameter(Mandatory = $false,
        HelpMessage = 'Connection timeout.')]
        [string]$TimeOut = 1
    )