w3af

w3af: web application attack and audit framework, the open source web vulnerability scanner.

4,544

1,215

4,544

2,020

View on GitHub

Top Related Projects

wpscan

8,559

WPScan WordPress security scanner. Written for security professionals and blog maintainers to test the security of their WordPress websites. Contact us via contact@wpscan.com

sqlmap

32,268

Automatic SQL injection and database takeover tool

Quick Overview

w3af (Web Application Attack and Audit Framework) is an open-source web application security scanner. It helps security researchers and penetration testers identify and exploit vulnerabilities in web applications. w3af is designed to be easy to use while providing powerful features for both automated and manual security testing.

Pros

Comprehensive scanning capabilities with over 200 plugins
Highly customizable and extensible through its plugin architecture
Supports both GUI and command-line interfaces for flexibility
Integrates well with other security tools and can be used in CI/CD pipelines

Cons

Can be resource-intensive, especially for large-scale scans
Learning curve for advanced features and custom plugin development
Some users report occasional stability issues or false positives
Documentation could be more extensive and up-to-date

Getting Started

To get started with w3af, follow these steps:

Install w3af:

git clone https://github.com/andresriancho/w3af.git
cd w3af
./w3af_console

Run a basic scan:

w3af>>> plugins
w3af/plugins>>> audit all
w3af/plugins>>> crawl web_spider
w3af/plugins>>> back
w3af>>> target
w3af/target>>> set target http://example.com/
w3af/target>>> back
w3af>>> start

This will perform a basic scan of the specified target using all audit plugins and the web spider for crawling. Adjust the plugins and target as needed for your specific use case.

Competitor Comparisons

nikto

8,470

Nikto web server scanner

Pros of Nikto

Lightweight and fast scanning capabilities
Extensive database of known vulnerabilities and misconfigurations
Easy to use with a simple command-line interface

Cons of Nikto

Less comprehensive than w3af in terms of overall functionality
Limited reporting options compared to w3af's detailed reports
Fewer customization options for scans

Code Comparison

Nikto (Perl):

sub nikto_headers {
    my ($mark) = @_;
    my %headers;
    foreach my $header (@{ $mark->{headers} }) {
        my ($key, $value) = split(/: /, $header, 2);
        $headers{lc($key)} = $value;
    }
    return %headers;
}

w3af (Python):

def get_headers(self, response):
    headers = {}
    for header_name, header_value in response.get_headers().items():
        headers[header_name.lower()] = header_value
    return headers

Both code snippets demonstrate header processing, but w3af's Python implementation is more concise and leverages built-in methods. Nikto's Perl code uses a more manual approach to split and process headers.

wpscan

8,559

WPScan WordPress security scanner. Written for security professionals and blog maintainers to test the security of their WordPress websites. Contact us via contact@wpscan.com

Pros of WPScan

Specialized for WordPress, offering more targeted and in-depth scanning for WordPress vulnerabilities
Regularly updated with the latest WordPress security issues and vulnerabilities
Includes a comprehensive database of WordPress plugins and themes for vulnerability detection

Cons of WPScan

Limited to WordPress sites, lacking versatility for other web applications
May require more manual configuration and interpretation of results compared to w3af's automated approach

Code Comparison

WPScan (Ruby):

def scan_wordpress_version
  wp_version = WpVersion.new(
    target_uri,
    options.merge(wp_content_dir: wp_content_dir, wp_plugins_dir: wp_plugins_dir)
  )
  wp_version.scan
  output('WordPress version', wp_version)
end

w3af (Python):

def scan(self, fuzzable_request, debugging_id):
    domain_path = fuzzable_request.get_url().get_domain_path()
    
    for file_pattern in self._get_file_patterns():
        for file_url in self._url_generator(domain_path, file_pattern):
            response = self._uri_opener.GET(file_url, cache=True)
            
            if is_404(response):
                continue
            
            self._analyze_response(response)

The code snippets show that WPScan is specifically designed for WordPress version scanning, while w3af has a more generic approach to web application scanning.

sqlmap

32,268

Automatic SQL injection and database takeover tool

Pros of sqlmap

Specialized tool focused solely on SQL injection, offering more advanced and comprehensive SQL injection techniques
Larger and more active community, resulting in frequent updates and extensive documentation
Supports a wider range of database management systems and injection techniques

Cons of sqlmap

Limited to SQL injection vulnerabilities, whereas w3af is a more comprehensive web application security scanner
Steeper learning curve due to its extensive features and command-line interface
May generate more noise and be easier to detect by intrusion detection systems

Code Comparison

w3af example (Python):

def get_long_desc(self):
    return """
    This plugin finds SQL injection vulnerabilities.
    """

sqlmap example (Python):

def getSqlInjectionType(self):
    retVal = None
    if Backend.getIdentifiedDbms():
        retVal = PAYLOAD.TECHNIQUE.UNION if conf.technique == PAYLOAD.TECHNIQUE.UNION else PAYLOAD.TECHNIQUE.BOOLEAN
    return retVal

The code snippets demonstrate that w3af uses a more general approach to vulnerability detection, while sqlmap employs specialized functions for SQL injection techniques.

zaproxy

12,618

The ZAP by Checkmarx Core project

Pros of ZAP

More active development and larger community support
Comprehensive GUI with user-friendly features
Better integration with CI/CD pipelines and other tools

Cons of ZAP

Steeper learning curve for beginners
Can be resource-intensive for large-scale scans

Code Comparison

w3af example:

def get_long_desc(self):
    return """
    This plugin finds CSRF vulnerabilities.

    To detect this vulnerability the plugin will send several requests to the
    server and analyze the responses.
    """

ZAP example:

@Override
public String getDescription() {
    return Constant.messages.getString("ascan.desc");
}

Both projects aim to provide web application security scanning capabilities. w3af is written in Python and focuses on being a flexible framework, while ZAP is Java-based and offers a more comprehensive GUI-driven approach. ZAP generally has more frequent updates and a larger user base, making it potentially more suitable for enterprise environments. However, w3af's simplicity and Python foundation may appeal to users who prefer a more lightweight and customizable solution.

XSStrike

13,141

Most advanced XSS scanner.

Pros of XSStrike

Focused specifically on XSS detection and exploitation
Lightweight and easy to use
Actively maintained with frequent updates

Cons of XSStrike

Limited to XSS vulnerabilities only
Less comprehensive than w3af for overall web application security testing
Smaller community and fewer resources available

Code Comparison

XSStrike (Python):

def scan(url, params, headers, GET, delay, timeout):
    global globalVariables
    globalVariables = {}
    paramData = {}
    try:
        if GET:
            response = requests.get(url, params=params, headers=headers, timeout=timeout, verify=False)

w3af (Python):

def scan(self, target, **kwargs):
    """
    Scans a target URL.
    
    :param target: A string representing the URL to test.
    :param kwargs: Other arguments
    :return: A list of vulnerabilities found.
    """
    return self._scan(target, **kwargs)

XSStrike is more focused on XSS-specific scanning, while w3af provides a more general-purpose web application security scanning framework. XSStrike's code is more streamlined for its specific purpose, while w3af's code is designed to be more extensible and handle a wider range of security tests.

Convert designs to code with AI

Introducing Visual Copilot: A new AI model to turn Figma designs to high quality code using your components.

Try Visual Copilot

README

w3af - Web Application Attack and Audit Framework

w3af is an open source web application security scanner which helps developers and penetration testers identify and exploit vulnerabilities in their web applications.

The scanner is able to identify 200+ vulnerabilities, including Cross-Site Scripting, SQL injection and OS commanding.

Contributing

Pull requests are always welcome! If you're not sure where to start, please take a look at the First steps as a contributor document in our wiki. All contributions, no matter how small, are welcome.

Links and documentation

Top Related Projects

Convert designs to code with AI

Introducing Visual Copilot: A new AI model to turn Figma designs to high quality code using your components.

Try Visual Copilot

Top Related Projects

Quick Overview

Pros

Cons

Getting Started

Competitor Comparisons

Pros of Nikto

Cons of Nikto

Code Comparison

Pros of WPScan

Cons of WPScan

Code Comparison

Pros of sqlmap

Cons of sqlmap

Code Comparison

Pros of ZAP

Cons of ZAP

Code Comparison

Pros of XSStrike

Cons of XSStrike

Code Comparison

Convert designs to code with AI

README

w3af - Web Application Attack and Audit Framework

Contributing

Links and documentation

Sponsors

Top Related Projects

Convert designs to code with AI