Pros of Nuclei

• Extensive template library with community contributions
• Highly customizable and flexible scanning engine
• Supports multiple protocols beyond HTTP (e.g., DNS, TCP, SSL)

Cons of Nuclei

• Steeper learning curve for creating custom templates
• Can be resource-intensive for large-scale scans
• Requires more setup and configuration compared to simpler tools

Code Comparison

Nuclei template example:

id: example-template
info:
  name: Example Template
  severity: info
requests:
  - method: GET
    path:
      - "{{BaseURL}}/example"
    matchers:
      - type: word
        words:
          - "Example Response"

VScan usage example:

vscan -t http://example.com -m dir

Key Differences

• Nuclei uses YAML-based templates for defining scans, while VScan relies on built-in modules
• Nuclei offers more advanced features and customization options
• VScan is generally simpler to use for basic scanning tasks

Use Cases

• Nuclei: Ideal for comprehensive vulnerability assessments and custom security checks
• VScan: Better suited for quick, straightforward scans with minimal setup

Pros of Nmap

• Extensive feature set and versatility for network scanning and security auditing
• Large, active community and continuous development
• Well-documented with comprehensive man pages and online resources

Cons of Nmap

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Can be resource-intensive for large-scale scans
• May trigger security alerts or be blocked by firewalls

Code Comparison

Nmap (C++):

static void tcp_scan(Target *target, u16 *portarray, int numports,
                     struct scan_lists *ports) {
  o.current_scantype = CONNECT_SCAN;
  tcp_scan_engine(target, portarray, numports, ports);
}

Vscan (Go):

func ScanPort(protocol string, hostname string, port int) bool {
    address := hostname + ":" + strconv.Itoa(port)
    conn, err := net.DialTimeout(protocol, address, time.Second)
    if err != nil {
        return false
    }
    defer conn.Close()
    return true
}

The code snippets show different approaches to port scanning. Nmap uses a more complex C++ implementation with a dedicated scan engine, while Vscan employs a simpler Go function for individual port checks.

Pros of Nikto

• More mature and widely used project with a larger community
• Extensive plugin system for customization and extensibility
• Comprehensive web server and web application vulnerability scanning

Cons of Nikto

• Slower scanning speed compared to VScan
• Less focus on modern web technologies and frameworks
• Perl-based, which may be less familiar to some developers

Code Comparison

Nikto (Perl):

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

VScan (Go):

func scanHeaders(headers http.Header) {
    for name, values := range headers {
        for _, value := range values {
            checkHeader(name, value)
        }
    }
}

The code snippets show different approaches to handling HTTP headers. Nikto uses Perl to parse and process headers, while VScan utilizes Go's built-in HTTP header handling. VScan's implementation is more concise and leverages Go's strong typing and standard library.

Pros of WPScan

• More comprehensive WordPress-specific scanning capabilities
• Larger community and more frequent updates
• Extensive database of known WordPress vulnerabilities

Cons of WPScan

• Slower scanning speed compared to VScan
• Limited to WordPress sites only
• Requires Ruby installation and dependencies

Code Comparison

WPScan (Ruby):

def scan_wordpress_version
  response = Browser.get(url_with_wrong_param)
  version = response.html.css('meta[name="generator"]').first['content'].to_s.strip
  version = version.match(/\d+\.\d+(\.\d+)?/)[0] if version =~ /\d+\.\d+(\.\d+)?/
  Version.new(version)
end

VScan (Go):

func ScanWordPressVersion(url string) (string, error) {
    resp, err := http.Get(url)
    if err != nil {
        return "", err
    }
    defer resp.Body.Close()
    // Parse HTML and extract version
    // ...
}

VScan is a more general-purpose web vulnerability scanner written in Go, while WPScan is specifically tailored for WordPress sites and written in Ruby. VScan offers faster scanning speeds and broader applicability, but WPScan provides more in-depth WordPress-specific vulnerability detection.

Pros of Gobuster

• More mature and widely used project with a larger community
• Supports multiple modes (DNS, vhost, directory/file enumeration)
• Actively maintained with regular updates and bug fixes

Cons of Gobuster

• Written in Go, which may have a steeper learning curve for some users
• Lacks some advanced features found in vscan, such as custom payload generation
• May be slower for certain types of scans compared to vscan

Code Comparison

vscan (Python):

def scan(self, target, port):
    sock = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
    sock.settimeout(self.timeout)
    result = sock.connect_ex((target, port))
    sock.close()
    return result == 0

Gobuster (Go):

func (s *Scanner) Scan(ctx context.Context, host string, port int) (bool, error) {
    address := fmt.Sprintf("%s:%d", host, port)
    conn, err := s.dialer.DialContext(ctx, "tcp", address)
    if err != nil {
        return false, err
    }
    conn.Close()
    return true, nil
}

Both code snippets show basic port scanning functionality, with vscan using Python's socket library and Gobuster using Go's net package. The main difference lies in the language-specific implementations and error handling approaches.

Pros of Aquatone

• More comprehensive web-based reconnaissance tool with screenshot capabilities
• Supports multiple input formats and integrates with other tools
• Active development and community support

Cons of Aquatone

• Primarily focused on web-based targets, less versatile for general network scanning
• Requires more dependencies and setup compared to vscan
• May be slower for large-scale scans due to its additional features

Code Comparison

Aquatone (Ruby):

def run_tasks(urls)
  threads = []
  urls.each do |url|
    threads << Thread.new { process_url(url) }
  end
  threads.each(&:join)
end

vscan (Go):

func ScanPorts(host string, ports []int) {
    for _, port := range ports {
        go scanPort(host, port)
    }
}

Key Differences

• Aquatone is written in Ruby, while vscan is written in Go
• Aquatone focuses on web reconnaissance with visual output, vscan is a lightweight port scanner
• Aquatone has more features and integrations, vscan is simpler and faster for basic port scanning

Use Cases

• Aquatone: Web application security assessments, bug bounty hunting
• vscan: Quick network scans, basic security audits, lightweight port enumeration