db_autopwn: Determining what exploit gained a shell

[version5 at gmail.com (nnp)]

I figured that was the reason all right. I think i might hack together
something all the same though, based on the exploit used or something,
if it works i'll contribute it..... if it doesn't... this conversation
never happened ;)

Cheers,
nnp

On 5/12/07, H D Moore <hdm at metasploit.com> wrote:
> Yup, theres a reason :-) Since this feature can launch modules against
> every type of OS or CPU supported by the framework, we need to pick the
> lowest common denominator for the payload options (bind, reverse).
> Nothing stops us from adding a method of specifying individual payloads
> for every unique OS/CPU combination, but it hasn't been implemented yet.
>
> -HD
>
> On Saturday 12 May 2007 11:28, nnp wrote:
> > Erm... right.... I probably should have mentioned I was talking about
> > db_autopwn. As in is there payload besides the -r and the -b options
> > that's available through db_autopwn and if there isn't is there a
> > reason why there isnt besides nobody getting around to it yet?


-- 
http://www.smashthestack.org
http://www.mastersofthewang.com