![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article title should be Metasploit Framework or Metasploit Project with a re-direct from Metasploit
"and automating the process of exploiting vulnerable software." There is no automation code in the metasploit framework (though technically a wrapper script could be written) automation has not been a priority for MSF.
The utility is also only written in perl (though version 3 will be in ruby), there are external additions which are included which are included in binary format (for dlls or shellcode) or python (for Inline Egg) but they are not an actual part of the Metasploit Framework.-- Vargc0 01:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I must say that I don't understand what's going on here. What exactly does this database contain? "Opcode types", i.e. "types of instruction codes of machine languages"? Who would find that useful? The term "opcode portability" also baffles me; by definition opcodes are specific to a machine language and are not portable between machines. What are "opcode classes" and "meta classes"? What are the "modules" that are referred to twice? Does the database perhaps contain modules rather than opcodes?
The paragraph reads as if it was written by someone who uses this database every day and for whom its usefulness is completely obvious. For the uninitiated reader, a standard use case would be very helpful. Why would I ever want to look anything up in this database? AxelBoldt 17:55, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
This software's license: http://metasploit.com/svn/framework3/trunk/documentation/LICENSE doesn't seem to be really Open Source, let alone Free Software (in an FSF sense). Do we have any links to license examination reports from anyone not associated with this project? I've tried to find some, but haven't come up with much.
If no relevant sources can be found, I'm going to remove the references to this being Open Source in 3 days.
-- NightMonkey 23:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC) It is currently under a BSD 3 clause license IRWolfie- ( talk) 22:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Here is a source for the BSD license: http://www.metasploit.com/redmine/projects/framework/repository/entry/README Ricky ( talk) 18:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
There is no "Controversy" section in the article, even though itis well-warranted!
The guys who develop Metasploit and the Defiler's Toolkit, etc. are not researchers, but anarchists and the net would be better if they were saccoed and vanzettied. Maybe in 40 years they would be rehabilitated, but we need to do something to help uphold law and order in the net NOW and they are a barrier, who are also abetting criminals.
Several pages worth of article: food for thought on the topic of Metasploit driven anti-forensics making crooks very happy: http://www.cio.com/article/print/114550
See this news article, or the Metasploit blog —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.58.103 ( talk) 17:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Metasploit Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:08, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Seems like a basic question one wants answered by others. Some information should be provided about using metasploit in a single machine and the safety of downloading from a site that can subsequently use the tool itself against its downloaders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.30.56.204 ( talk) 11:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Any thoughts on including the meterpreter commands in this article? Or maybe creating a new article specifically for meterpreter? I'm thinking about writing it up. DoctorG (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Should there be a new page for Rapid7 the company? -- XtinaS ( talk) 14:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article title should be Metasploit Framework or Metasploit Project with a re-direct from Metasploit
"and automating the process of exploiting vulnerable software." There is no automation code in the metasploit framework (though technically a wrapper script could be written) automation has not been a priority for MSF.
The utility is also only written in perl (though version 3 will be in ruby), there are external additions which are included which are included in binary format (for dlls or shellcode) or python (for Inline Egg) but they are not an actual part of the Metasploit Framework.-- Vargc0 01:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I must say that I don't understand what's going on here. What exactly does this database contain? "Opcode types", i.e. "types of instruction codes of machine languages"? Who would find that useful? The term "opcode portability" also baffles me; by definition opcodes are specific to a machine language and are not portable between machines. What are "opcode classes" and "meta classes"? What are the "modules" that are referred to twice? Does the database perhaps contain modules rather than opcodes?
The paragraph reads as if it was written by someone who uses this database every day and for whom its usefulness is completely obvious. For the uninitiated reader, a standard use case would be very helpful. Why would I ever want to look anything up in this database? AxelBoldt 17:55, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
This software's license: http://metasploit.com/svn/framework3/trunk/documentation/LICENSE doesn't seem to be really Open Source, let alone Free Software (in an FSF sense). Do we have any links to license examination reports from anyone not associated with this project? I've tried to find some, but haven't come up with much.
If no relevant sources can be found, I'm going to remove the references to this being Open Source in 3 days.
-- NightMonkey 23:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC) It is currently under a BSD 3 clause license IRWolfie- ( talk) 22:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Here is a source for the BSD license: http://www.metasploit.com/redmine/projects/framework/repository/entry/README Ricky ( talk) 18:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
There is no "Controversy" section in the article, even though itis well-warranted!
The guys who develop Metasploit and the Defiler's Toolkit, etc. are not researchers, but anarchists and the net would be better if they were saccoed and vanzettied. Maybe in 40 years they would be rehabilitated, but we need to do something to help uphold law and order in the net NOW and they are a barrier, who are also abetting criminals.
Several pages worth of article: food for thought on the topic of Metasploit driven anti-forensics making crooks very happy: http://www.cio.com/article/print/114550
See this news article, or the Metasploit blog —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.58.103 ( talk) 17:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Metasploit Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:08, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Seems like a basic question one wants answered by others. Some information should be provided about using metasploit in a single machine and the safety of downloading from a site that can subsequently use the tool itself against its downloaders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.30.56.204 ( talk) 11:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Any thoughts on including the meterpreter commands in this article? Or maybe creating a new article specifically for meterpreter? I'm thinking about writing it up. DoctorG (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Should there be a new page for Rapid7 the company? -- XtinaS ( talk) 14:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)