linux-exploit-suggester

Pros of PEASS-ng

• More comprehensive, covering both Linux and Windows systems
• Actively maintained with frequent updates
• Includes additional features like privilege escalation techniques and enumeration scripts

Cons of PEASS-ng

• Larger codebase, potentially more complex to use and maintain
• May have a steeper learning curve for beginners
• Could trigger more false positives due to its extensive checks

Code Comparison

PEASS-ng (LinPEAS):

if [ "$(command -v nmap)" ]; then
  echo "nmap was found in PATH"
  nmap_loc="$(command -v nmap)"
  echo "nmap location: $nmap_loc"
  nmap_version=$(nmap --version | grep "Nmap version" | cut -d " " -f3)
  echo "nmap version: $nmap_version"
fi

linux-exploit-suggester:

if [ -x "$(command -v nmap)" ]; then
  printf "%b" "$GREEN"
  printf "nmap is installed\n"
  printf "%b" "$RESET"
else
  printf "%b" "$RED"
  printf "nmap is not installed\n"
  printf "%b" "$RESET"
fi

Both scripts check for the presence of nmap, but PEASS-ng provides more detailed information about its location and version, while linux-exploit-suggester focuses on a simple installed/not installed check.

Pros of linux-exploit-suggester

• More actively maintained with recent updates
• Includes a wider range of exploits and vulnerabilities
• Offers better compatibility with modern Linux distributions

Cons of linux-exploit-suggester

• May have a steeper learning curve for beginners
• Potentially slower execution due to more comprehensive checks

Code Comparison

linux-exploit-suggester:

#!/bin/bash
VERSION=v1.1

# Parse command line arguments
while [[ $# -gt 0 ]]; do
    key="$1"

linux-exploit-suggester>:

#!/bin/bash
VERSION=v0.9

# Parse command line arguments
while [[ $# -gt 0 ]]; do
    key="$1"

The code snippets show that linux-exploit-suggester has a more recent version number, indicating more frequent updates and potentially improved features or bug fixes.

Both repositories serve similar purposes in identifying potential Linux vulnerabilities, but linux-exploit-suggester appears to be the more up-to-date and comprehensive option. However, users should consider their specific needs and skill level when choosing between the two tools.

Pros of linux-exploit-suggester-2

• More recent updates and active maintenance
• Improved performance and faster execution
• Enhanced detection capabilities for newer vulnerabilities

Cons of linux-exploit-suggester-2

• Less comprehensive documentation compared to the original
• Fewer configuration options and customization features
• Smaller community and fewer contributors

Code Comparison

linux-exploit-suggester:

#!/bin/bash
VERSION=v0.9
LAST_EDIT="2018-06-13"

linux-exploit-suggester-2:

#!/usr/bin/perl
$VERSION = "2.0";

The original linux-exploit-suggester is written in Bash, while linux-exploit-suggester-2 is implemented in Perl. This change in programming language may contribute to the performance improvements in the newer version.

linux-exploit-suggester-2 has a more streamlined codebase, which can lead to faster execution times. However, the original version offers more extensive comments and documentation within the code itself.

Both tools serve similar purposes, aiming to identify potential kernel vulnerabilities on Linux systems. The choice between them may depend on specific requirements, such as execution speed, compatibility, or the need for the latest vulnerability detections.

Pros of LinEnum

• More comprehensive system enumeration, covering a wider range of system information
• Includes checks for sensitive files and potential misconfigurations
• Actively maintained with regular updates and contributions

Cons of LinEnum

• Larger script size, potentially slower execution on target systems
• May generate more noise in output, requiring more analysis to identify critical issues
• Less focused on specific exploit suggestions

Code Comparison

LinEnum:

#!/bin/bash
version="0.982"

# ... (extensive system checks and enumeration logic)

cat $report

linux-exploit-suggester:

#!/usr/bin/env bash

VERSION=v1.1 (2021-11-23)

# ... (focused on kernel version checks and exploit matching)

print_exploits

LinEnum provides a more comprehensive system analysis, while linux-exploit-suggester focuses specifically on identifying potential kernel exploits based on the system version. LinEnum's code is more extensive, covering various system aspects, whereas linux-exploit-suggester has a more targeted approach to exploit suggestion.

Pros of linuxprivchecker

• More comprehensive system information gathering, including network configurations and installed packages
• Provides a detailed report of potential privilege escalation vectors
• Actively maintained with recent updates

Cons of linuxprivchecker

• Focuses more on information gathering rather than suggesting specific exploits
• May require more manual analysis of the output to identify vulnerabilities
• Larger script size, potentially less suitable for quick deployment in constrained environments

Code Comparison

linuxprivchecker:

def get_system_info():
    print("[*] GETTING SYSTEM INFO...\n")
    results = []
    sysInfo = {"OS": execute("cat /etc/issue").strip('\n\r\t'),
               "Kernel": execute("uname -r"),
               "Hostname": execute("hostname")}
    results.append(sysInfo)
    return results

linux-exploit-suggester:

get_system_information() {
    printf "\n[+] Collecting system information\n"
    printf "    Linux Kernel: "
    uname -sr
    printf "    OS: "
    [ -f /etc/os-release ] && cat /etc/os-release | grep -E "^(NAME|VERSION)=" | tr '\n' ' '
    [ -f /etc/lsb-release ] && cat /etc/lsb-release | grep -E "^(DISTRIB_ID|DISTRIB_RELEASE)=" | tr '\n' ' '
    printf "\n"
}

Both scripts gather system information, but linuxprivchecker uses Python and provides more structured output, while linux-exploit-suggester uses Bash and focuses on kernel and OS version information.

Pros of BeRoot

• Multi-platform support (Windows, Linux, macOS)
• Comprehensive privilege escalation checks beyond kernel exploits
• Active development and regular updates

Cons of BeRoot

• Larger codebase, potentially slower execution
• Requires Python environment to run
• May produce more false positives due to broader scope

Code Comparison

BeRoot (Python):

def check_suid_bin():
    suid = []
    for path in os.environ['PATH'].split(':'):
        for file in os.listdir(path):
            try:
                if os.stat(os.path.join(path, file)).st_mode & stat.S_ISUID:
                    suid.append(os.path.join(path, file))
            except:
                pass
    return suid

linux-exploit-suggester (Bash):

version_compare() {
    [ "$1" = "$2" ] && return 0
    ver1front=$(echo "$1" | cut -d "." -f -1)
    ver1back=$(echo "$1" | cut -d "." -f 2-)
    ver2front=$(echo "$2" | cut -d "." -f -1)
    ver2back=$(echo "$2" | cut -d "." -f 2-)
    [ "$ver1front" -gt "$ver2front" ] && return 0
    [ "$ver1front" -lt "$ver2front" ] && return 1
    [ "$ver1back" ] || [ "$ver2back" ] || return 0
    version_compare "$ver1back" "$ver2back"
}