Pros of CrackMapExec

• Specialized for Windows/Active Directory environments
• Extensive built-in modules for various post-exploitation tasks
• Lightweight and easy to deploy

Cons of CrackMapExec

• Limited cross-platform support (primarily Windows-focused)
• Less flexible for custom payload development
• Narrower scope of functionality compared to Pupy's versatility

Code Comparison

CrackMapExec example:

from crackmapexec import CME

cme = CME()
cme.target = "192.168.1.0/24"
cme.module = "mimikatz"
cme.execute()

Pupy example:

import pupylib.PupyModule

class MyModule(pupylib.PupyModule.PupyModule):
    def init_argparse(self):
        self.arg_parser.add_argument('target', help='Target IP')

    def run(self, args):
        self.client.conn.modules.os.system('whoami')

CrackMapExec is more focused on Windows/AD environments with built-in modules, while Pupy offers greater flexibility for cross-platform operations and custom payload development. CrackMapExec excels in rapid AD enumeration and exploitation, whereas Pupy provides a more comprehensive framework for diverse post-exploitation scenarios. The code examples illustrate CrackMapExec's simplicity for predefined tasks, while Pupy demonstrates its extensibility for creating custom modules.

Pros of Empire

• More extensive post-exploitation capabilities and modules
• Better suited for Windows environments with PowerShell-based payloads
• Larger community and more frequent updates

Cons of Empire

• Primarily focused on Windows, less versatile for cross-platform operations
• Heavier footprint and potentially easier to detect
• Steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

Empire (PowerShell-based payload):

$s=New-Object IO.MemoryStream(,[Convert]::FromBase64String("H4sIAAAAAAAAAL1Xe2..."));
IEX (New-Object IO.StreamReader(New-Object IO.Compression.GzipStream($s,[IO.Compression.CompressionMode]::Decompress))).ReadToEnd();

Pupy (Python-based payload):

import pupyimporter
pupyimporter.install()
import pupy
pupy.main()

Key Differences

• Pupy is more versatile, supporting multiple platforms (Windows, Linux, macOS, Android)
• Empire focuses on PowerShell-based attacks, while Pupy uses Python for cross-platform compatibility
• Pupy offers a wider range of communication protocols and transport layers
• Empire has a more extensive module library for Windows post-exploitation
• Pupy provides a more flexible and customizable framework for payload generation

Both tools are powerful post-exploitation frameworks, but they cater to different needs and environments. Empire excels in Windows-centric operations, while Pupy offers greater flexibility across various platforms.

Pros of Merlin

• Written in Go, offering better cross-platform compatibility and easier deployment
• Supports multiple communication protocols (HTTP/1.1, HTTP/2, HTTPS)
• Implements advanced evasion techniques like domain fronting

Cons of Merlin

• Fewer built-in modules compared to Pupy
• Less extensive documentation and community support
• Lacks some of the more advanced features found in Pupy (e.g., audio recording, webcam capture)

Code Comparison

Merlin (Go):

func (a *Agent) executeCommand(cmd string) (string, error) {
    execution, err := a.executeShellcode(cmd)
    if err != nil {
        return "", err
    }
    return string(execution), nil
}

Pupy (Python):

def execute(self, command):
    try:
        output = subprocess.check_output(command, shell=True)
        return output.decode('utf-8')
    except subprocess.CalledProcessError as e:
        return str(e)

Both repositories provide post-exploitation frameworks, but they differ in implementation and features. Merlin focuses on stealth and evasion, while Pupy offers a wider range of built-in modules and capabilities. The code comparison shows how each project handles command execution, with Merlin using Go's concurrency features and Pupy relying on Python's subprocess module.

Pros of Metasploit-framework

• Larger community and more extensive exploit database
• Better documentation and support
• More mature project with regular updates and maintenance

Cons of Metasploit-framework

• Larger footprint and more complex setup
• Less stealthy, more likely to be detected by antivirus software
• Primarily focused on exploitation rather than post-exploitation

Code Comparison

Metasploit-framework (Ruby):

class MetasploitModule < Msf::Exploit::Remote
  Rank = ExcellentRanking
  include Msf::Exploit::Remote::HTTP::Wordpress
  def exploit
    # Exploit code here
  end
end

Pupy (Python):

class PupyModule(PupyModule):
    """ Description of the module """
    dependencies = ['pupyutils.basic_cmds']
    def init_argparse(self):
        # Argument parsing
    def run(self, args):
        # Module execution code

Both frameworks use object-oriented programming, but Metasploit uses Ruby while Pupy uses Python. Metasploit's modules are more focused on specific exploits, while Pupy's modules are designed for post-exploitation tasks and command execution.

Pros of PowerSploit

• Specifically designed for PowerShell, making it highly effective on Windows systems
• Extensive collection of PowerShell modules for various post-exploitation tasks
• Well-documented and actively maintained by the security community

Cons of PowerSploit

• Limited to Windows environments and PowerShell
• May be more easily detected by modern antivirus solutions due to its popularity
• Requires PowerShell execution policy to be bypassed in some cases

Code Comparison

PowerSploit (PowerView module):

Get-NetDomain
Get-NetUser
Get-NetComputer
Invoke-UserHunter
Find-LocalAdminAccess

Pupy (Python-based commands):

from pupylib.PupyModule import *
run(["net", "user"])
run(["net", "localgroup", "administrators"])
run(["systeminfo"])
run(["tasklist"])

PowerSploit focuses on PowerShell-specific commands for Windows environments, while Pupy offers a more versatile approach with Python-based commands that can work across different operating systems. PowerSploit's commands are more tailored for Windows domain enumeration and exploitation, whereas Pupy's commands are more general-purpose and can be adapted for various scenarios.