-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 786
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SMB vulnerable port fix #664
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #664 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 56.92% 56.62% -0.31%
===========================================
Files 117 120 +3
Lines 3926 4044 +118
===========================================
+ Hits 2235 2290 +55
- Misses 1691 1754 +63
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
||
def set_vulnerable_port(self, host: VictimHost): | ||
if 'tcp-445' in self.host.services: | ||
self.vulnerable_port = "445" | ||
elif 'tcp-139' in self.host.services: | ||
self.vulnerable_port = "139" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's a hidden temporal coupling here. What if none of these services are in the list?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
vulnerable port remains none, which is fine
What is this?
Fixes SMB exploiter not passing vulnerable port (thus causing redundant exploitations)
Checklist
Proof that it works