[ipv6hackers] The state of IPv6 (pen)testing and the future
mh at mh-sec.de
Thu Jan 24 09:37:30 CET 2013
On 24.01.2013 06:21, Fernando Gont wrote:
> In general, you have two types of tools, which kind of serve different
> 1) THC's IPv6 attack toolkit - like
> 2) SI6 toolkit - like
> "1)" allows you to exploit specific vectors in a straightforward way. So
> if you're doing a pentest, and want to try those specific vectors, they
> are extremely handy.
> "2)" allows you to try any stuff you *understand*, even if the author of
> the tools didn't think about those vectors. This extremely flexible, but
> I guess might be a bit disappointing for folks running some of the tools
> and finding "nothing happened" (i.e., "wtf!?"-like sort of reactions,
> together with "what's the magic I should give this tool?"). These tools
> are a middle-ground between scapy and THCs :-)
> As with everything, you probably want to have both toolkits handy...
> each has its uses.
yes and I am grateful that Fernando took a different approach than mine.
This way whatever you want to do, one of the toolkits will be more
suited to solve the deal. so the complement each other perfectly.
together with scapy for easy packet creation you basically have
everything you need at hand.
still - more tools would be better, because different minds think about
different attacks and tests. and competition also helps to make things
PGP: FEDD 5B50 C087 F8DF 5CB9 876F 7FDD E533 BF4F 891A
More information about the Ipv6hackers