airgeddon

This is a multi-use bash script for Linux systems to audit wireless networks.

6,450

1,173

6,450

View on GitHub

Top Related Projects

fluxion

4,960

Fluxion is a remake of linset by vk496 with enhanced functionality.

wifite2

6,382

Rewrite of the popular wireless network auditor, "wifite"

eaphammer

2,126

Targeted evil twin attacks against WPA2-Enterprise networks. Indirect wireless pivots using hostile portal attacks.

WiFi-Pumpkin-deprecated

3,086

DEPRECATED, wifipumpkin3 -> https://github.com/P0cL4bs/wifipumpkin3

mana

1,086

*DEPRECATED* mana toolkit for wifi rogue AP attacks and MitM

Quick Overview

Airgeddon is a multi-use bash script for Linux systems that automates wireless network auditing. It provides a comprehensive set of tools for penetration testing and security analysis of Wi-Fi networks, including various attack modes and exploitation techniques.

Pros

Comprehensive suite of wireless auditing tools in one script
User-friendly interface with menu-driven options
Regular updates and active community support
Supports multiple languages and operating systems

Cons

Potential for misuse in unauthorized network penetration
Requires root privileges, which may pose security risks
Some features may not work on all wireless adapters
Can be complex for beginners to use effectively

Getting Started

Clone the repository:

git clone https://github.com/v1s1t0r1sh3r3/airgeddon.git

Navigate to the airgeddon directory:
```
cd airgeddon
```
Make the script executable:
```
chmod +x airgeddon.sh
```
Run the script with root privileges:
```
sudo ./airgeddon.sh
```
Follow the on-screen menu to select desired auditing options and tools.

Note: Ensure you have the necessary dependencies installed and a compatible wireless adapter before running the script. Always use this tool responsibly and only on networks you own or have explicit permission to test.

Competitor Comparisons

wifiphisher

13,190

The Rogue Access Point Framework

Pros of Wifiphisher

More user-friendly interface with a simpler setup process
Focuses on social engineering attacks, making it effective for less technical users
Regularly updated with new phishing scenarios and attack vectors

Cons of Wifiphisher

Limited to specific attack types, primarily phishing-based
Less comprehensive toolset compared to Airgeddon's wide range of features
May require additional tools for more advanced wireless attacks

Code Comparison

Wifiphisher (Python):

def start(self):
    self.network_manager.start()
    self.template_manager.start()
    self.phishinghttp.start()
    self.deauthentication.start()

Airgeddon (Bash):

function start_airgeddon() {
    initialize_script_settings
    load_language
    check_dependencies
    set_main_interface
    initialize_menu
}

Both projects use different programming languages, with Wifiphisher utilizing Python for a more structured approach, while Airgeddon employs Bash scripting for system-level interactions and flexibility.

fluxion

4,960

Fluxion is a remake of linset by vk496 with enhanced functionality.

Pros of Fluxion

More focused on social engineering attacks and phishing
Simpler user interface for beginners
Supports multiple languages for phishing pages

Cons of Fluxion

Less actively maintained (last update over a year ago)
Fewer wireless attack options compared to Airgeddon
Limited to WPA/WPA2 attacks

Code Comparison

Fluxion (PHP-based phishing page):

<?php
if(isset($_POST['password'])) {
    $pass = $_POST['password'];
    file_put_contents("captured_passwords.txt", $pass . "\n", FILE_APPEND);
    header('Location: loading.html');
    exit();
}
?>

Airgeddon (Bash-based attack launcher):

function launch_attack() {
    case $attack_mode in
        1) evil_twin_attack ;;
        2) captive_portal_attack ;;
        3) wps_attack ;;
    esac
}

Both tools are designed for wireless network security testing, but they have different focuses. Fluxion specializes in social engineering and phishing attacks, while Airgeddon offers a broader range of wireless attack options. Fluxion's simpler interface may be more appealing to beginners, but Airgeddon's active development and extensive feature set make it more versatile for advanced users.

wifite2

6,382

Rewrite of the popular wireless network auditor, "wifite"

Pros of wifite2

Simpler and more straightforward to use, especially for beginners
Faster execution due to its focused approach on WiFi auditing
Lightweight with fewer dependencies

Cons of wifite2

Less comprehensive feature set compared to airgeddon
Limited customization options
Fewer attack vectors and tools integrated

Code Comparison

wifite2:

def crack_handshake(handshake, wordlist, essid=None, show_command=False):
    # Crack handshake using aircrack-ng
    command = [
        'aircrack-ng',
        '-a', '2',
        '-w', wordlist,
        '-l', cls.cracked_file,
        handshake
    ]

airgeddon:

function crack_handshake() {
    debug_print

    if [ "${DICTIONARY}" = "rockyou.txt" ]; then
        if [ ! -f "${ROCKYOU_PATH}" ]; then
            if [ -f "${ROCKYOU_PATH}.gz" ]; then
                gunzip "${ROCKYOU_PATH}.gz"
            else
                echo -e "${yellow_color}[${red_color}!${yellow_color}] ${pink_color}Rockyou.txt${yellow_color} dictionary not found${normal_color}"
                return 1
            fi
        fi
    fi

The code snippets show different approaches to cracking WiFi handshakes. wifite2 uses Python and directly calls aircrack-ng, while airgeddon uses Bash scripting with more extensive error handling and dictionary management.

eaphammer

2,126

Targeted evil twin attacks against WPA2-Enterprise networks. Indirect wireless pivots using hostile portal attacks.

Pros of eaphammer

Focused specifically on EAP-based attacks, providing more specialized tools for this attack vector
Includes advanced features like hostile portal attacks and indirect wireless pivots
Supports integration with Responder for enhanced credential harvesting

Cons of eaphammer

More limited in scope compared to airgeddon's broader range of wireless attack options
Less active development and community support (fewer contributors and updates)
Steeper learning curve for users not specifically focused on EAP attacks

Code Comparison

eaphammer (setup.py):

setup(
    name='eaphammer',
    version='1.13.0',
    author='Gabriel Ryan',
    description='Targeted evil twin attacks against WPA2-Enterprise networks',
    packages=find_packages(),
    install_requires=[
        'click',
        'termcolor',
        'pyOpenSSL',
    ],
)

airgeddon (airgeddon.sh):

function initialize_script_settings() {
    debug_mode=0
    language="en"
    check_dependencies=1
    auto_update=1
    allow_bettercap_update=1
    allow_rgui=1
}

Both projects use different programming languages, reflecting their distinct approaches. eaphammer is primarily Python-based, focusing on EAP attacks, while airgeddon is a Bash script offering a wider range of wireless attack options.

WiFi-Pumpkin-deprecated

3,086

DEPRECATED, wifipumpkin3 -> https://github.com/P0cL4bs/wifipumpkin3

Pros of WiFi-Pumpkin-deprecated

Offers a graphical user interface, making it more user-friendly for those less comfortable with command-line tools
Includes additional features like DNS spoofing and phishing capabilities
Provides real-time monitoring and logging of network activities

Cons of WiFi-Pumpkin-deprecated

No longer actively maintained, potentially leading to compatibility issues with newer systems
Less comprehensive wireless attack options compared to airgeddon
May have unresolved security vulnerabilities due to lack of updates

Code Comparison

WiFi-Pumpkin-deprecated:

def Start(self):
    self.interfaces = Refactor.get_interfaces()
    self.cb_interface.addItems(self.interfaces)

airgeddon:

function set_chipset() {
    debug_print

    if [ "$1" = "internal" ]; then
        chipset=$(airmon-ng | grep "${interface}" | awk -F' ' '{print $4}')
    elif [ "$1" = "external" ]; then
        chipset=$(airmon-ng | grep "${secondary_wifi_interface}" | awk -F' ' '{print $4}')
    fi
}

The code snippets show different approaches: WiFi-Pumpkin-deprecated uses Python with a focus on GUI elements, while airgeddon employs Bash scripting for command-line operations. This reflects their differing design philosophies and target user bases.

mana

1,086

*DEPRECATED* mana toolkit for wifi rogue AP attacks and MitM

Pros of mana

Focuses specifically on rogue access point attacks and man-in-the-middle techniques
Includes built-in tools for SSL stripping and DNS spoofing
Designed for more advanced penetration testing scenarios

Cons of mana

Less actively maintained compared to airgeddon
More complex setup and configuration process
Limited to specific attack vectors, while airgeddon offers a broader range of wireless attacks

Code Comparison

mana (Python):

def start_ap():
    os.system("hostapd /etc/mana-toolkit/hostapd-mana.conf &")
    os.system("dhcpd -cf /etc/mana-toolkit/dhcpd.conf")

airgeddon (Bash):

function start_fake_ap() {
    create_hostapd_config
    "${AIRMON}" start "${interface}" "${channel}" > /dev/null 2>&1
    hostapd "${tmpdir}${hostapd_file}" > /dev/null 2>&1 &
}

Both projects implement functions to start access points, but mana uses Python and system calls, while airgeddon uses Bash scripting. airgeddon's approach allows for more flexibility and easier customization, while mana's Python implementation may be more familiar to some users.