Convert Figma logo to code with AI

rootphantomer logoBlasting_dictionary

爆破字典

4,893
2,876
4,893
0

Top Related Projects

57,590

SecLists is the security tester's companion. It's a collection of multiple types of lists used during security assessments, collected in one place. List types include usernames, passwords, URLs, sensitive data patterns, fuzzing payloads, web shells, and many more.

1,357

Dictionary of attack patterns and primitives for black-box application fault injection and resource discovery.

A list of useful payloads and bypass for Web Application Security and Pentest/CTF

A collection of Burpsuite Intruder payloads, BurpBounty payloads, fuzz lists, malicious file uploads and web pentesting methodologies and checklists.

5,916

Web application fuzzer

Quick Overview

The Blasting_dictionary repository is a collection of password dictionaries and wordlists for various purposes, including penetration testing and security research. It contains a wide range of dictionaries in different languages and for specific use cases, such as common passwords, usernames, and domain names.

Pros

  • Comprehensive collection of password dictionaries and wordlists
  • Includes dictionaries in multiple languages (e.g., Chinese, English)
  • Regularly updated with new additions
  • Useful for security professionals and researchers

Cons

  • Large file sizes may be difficult to download or manage
  • Some dictionaries may contain outdated or less relevant entries
  • Potential for misuse if not handled responsibly
  • Lack of detailed documentation or categorization for some files

Getting Started

As this is not a code library but a collection of dictionaries, there's no code to run. However, you can use these dictionaries with various security tools or custom scripts. Here's a basic example of how you might use one of these dictionaries with a hypothetical password cracking tool:

# Clone the repository
git clone https://github.com/rootphantomer/Blasting_dictionary.git

# Navigate to the directory
cd Blasting_dictionary

# Use a dictionary with a hypothetical password cracking tool
hypothetical_cracker -w password_dict_1.txt -t target_system

Note: Always ensure you have proper authorization before using these dictionaries for any security testing or research purposes.

Competitor Comparisons

57,590

SecLists is the security tester's companion. It's a collection of multiple types of lists used during security assessments, collected in one place. List types include usernames, passwords, URLs, sensitive data patterns, fuzzing payloads, web shells, and many more.

Pros of SecLists

  • More comprehensive and diverse set of wordlists for various security testing scenarios
  • Regularly updated and maintained by a large community of contributors
  • Well-organized directory structure for easy navigation and usage

Cons of SecLists

  • Larger file size and repository, which may be overkill for simple projects
  • Some lists may contain redundant or less relevant entries
  • Requires more time to familiarize with the extensive collection

Code comparison

SecLists:

admin
password
123456
12345678
qwerty

Blasting_dictionary:

admin
administrator
root
test
guest

Summary

SecLists offers a more extensive and diverse collection of wordlists, making it suitable for a wide range of security testing scenarios. It benefits from regular updates and a well-organized structure. However, its large size may be excessive for simple projects, and users might need more time to navigate the extensive collection.

Blasting_dictionary provides a more focused and compact set of wordlists, which can be beneficial for quick and straightforward testing. While it may lack the depth and variety of SecLists, it offers a simpler approach for users who need a basic dictionary for their projects.

1,357

Dictionary of attack patterns and primitives for black-box application fault injection and resource discovery.

Pros of fuzzdb

  • More comprehensive and diverse set of fuzzing payloads
  • Better organized directory structure for easier navigation
  • Regularly updated with new payloads and attack patterns

Cons of fuzzdb

  • Larger repository size, potentially slower to clone and manage
  • May include unnecessary files for specific use cases
  • Higher complexity, which could be overwhelming for beginners

Code comparison

fuzzdb:

/discovery/predictable-filepaths/filename-dirname-bruteforce/Extensions.Backup.txt
/attack/sql-injection/detect/GenericBlind.txt
/web-backdoors/php/simple-backdoor.php

Blasting_dictionary:

/password/top500.txt
/username/top500.txt
/directory/directory.txt

Summary

fuzzdb offers a more extensive and well-organized collection of fuzzing payloads, making it suitable for advanced security testing. However, its larger size and complexity may be overwhelming for some users. Blasting_dictionary provides a simpler structure with focused wordlists for common attack vectors, which could be more appropriate for basic penetration testing or beginner-level security assessments. The choice between the two repositories depends on the specific requirements of the security testing project and the user's level of expertise.

A list of useful payloads and bypass for Web Application Security and Pentest/CTF

Pros of PayloadsAllTheThings

  • Comprehensive collection of payloads for various attack vectors and security testing scenarios
  • Well-organized structure with categories for different types of vulnerabilities
  • Regularly updated with contributions from the security community

Cons of PayloadsAllTheThings

  • May be overwhelming for beginners due to the vast amount of information
  • Lacks specific focus on dictionary-based attacks or wordlists
  • Some payloads may require additional context or expertise to use effectively

Code Comparison

Blasting_dictionary:

123456
password
12345678
qwerty
123456789
12345
1234
111111

PayloadsAllTheThings:

# SQL Injection
admin' --
' OR '1'='1
' UNION SELECT username, password FROM users--

# XSS
<script>alert('XSS')</script>

The code snippets demonstrate the difference in focus between the two repositories. Blasting_dictionary primarily contains simple password lists, while PayloadsAllTheThings offers more complex payloads for various attack vectors.

PayloadsAllTheThings is better suited for comprehensive security testing and penetration testing scenarios, offering a wide range of payloads for different vulnerabilities. Blasting_dictionary, on the other hand, is more focused on providing wordlists for dictionary-based attacks and password cracking.

A collection of Burpsuite Intruder payloads, BurpBounty payloads, fuzz lists, malicious file uploads and web pentesting methodologies and checklists.

Pros of IntruderPayloads

  • More comprehensive collection of payloads for various attack vectors
  • Better organized into categories for easier navigation
  • Regularly updated with new payloads and techniques

Cons of IntruderPayloads

  • Larger repository size may be overwhelming for beginners
  • Some payloads may be outdated or less effective against modern systems
  • Requires more careful handling due to potentially malicious content

Code Comparison

IntruderPayloads:

<script>alert(1)</script>
<img src=x onerror=alert(1)>
"><svg/onload=alert(1)>"

Blasting_dictionary:

admin
password
123456

The IntruderPayloads example shows XSS payloads, while Blasting_dictionary focuses on common passwords and usernames.

IntruderPayloads offers a wider range of attack vectors and more sophisticated payloads, making it suitable for advanced penetration testing. Blasting_dictionary, on the other hand, provides a simpler list of common credentials, which can be useful for basic brute-force attacks or password auditing.

Both repositories serve different purposes in the security testing landscape, with IntruderPayloads being more comprehensive and Blasting_dictionary offering a straightforward approach to credential testing.

5,916

Web application fuzzer

Pros of wfuzz

  • More comprehensive web application fuzzing tool with broader capabilities
  • Actively maintained with regular updates and contributions
  • Extensive documentation and community support

Cons of wfuzz

  • Steeper learning curve due to more complex functionality
  • Requires more setup and configuration for basic usage
  • Larger codebase and dependencies

Code comparison

Blasting_dictionary (example usage):

import blasting_dictionary

wordlist = blasting_dictionary.load_wordlist("common_passwords.txt")
for word in wordlist:
    # Perform password cracking or fuzzing

wfuzz (example usage):

from wfuzz import Wfuzz

wfuzz = Wfuzz()
for r in wfuzz.fuzz(url="http://example.com/FUZZ", hc=[404], payloads=[("file", dict(fn="wordlist.txt"))]):
    print(r)

Summary

Blasting_dictionary is a simpler tool focused on providing wordlists for various purposes, while wfuzz is a more comprehensive web application fuzzing framework. Blasting_dictionary is easier to use for basic tasks but has limited functionality. wfuzz offers more advanced features and flexibility but requires more setup and expertise to use effectively. Choose based on your specific needs and level of expertise in web application security testing.

Convert Figma logo designs to code with AI

Visual Copilot

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

Try Visual Copilot

README

Blasting_dictionary

爆破字典