A penetration tester exploited a vulnerability on a server and remotely ran a payload to gain a shell. However, a connection was not established, and no errors were shown on the payload execution. The penetration tester suspected that a network device, like an IPS or next-generation firewall, was dropping the connection. Which of the following payloads are MOST likely to establish a shell successfully?
When a penetration tester suspects that a network device like an IPS or next-generation firewall is dropping connections, using a payload that leverages SSL/TLS encryption, such as the windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https payload, is most likely to establish a shell successfully. The HTTPS protocol is commonly allowed through firewalls and its encrypted nature helps in evading detection and blocking mechanisms, making it less likely for the network device to interfere with the connection.
A reverse tcp connection is usually used to bypass firewall restrictions on open ports. A firewall usually blocks incoming connections on open ports, but does not block outgoing traffic. windows/meterpreter/reverse_tcp allows you to remotely control the file system, sniff, keylog, hashdump, perform network pivoting, control the webcam and microphone, etc.
The answer is E. windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https. If the penetration tester suspects that a network device like an IPS or next-generation firewall is dropping the connection, using a payload with SSL/TLS encryption may help evade detection. The windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https payload is a good choice for this scenario, as it provides a reverse HTTPS meterpreter shell that uses SSL/TLS encryption to communicate between the attacker and the target. This payload is less likely to be detected and dropped by a network device, as it uses the standard HTTPS protocol that is commonly allowed through firewalls.
This is true. I found a blog that specifically addressed this scenario, but for the life of me I can't find the site again. The encryption of HTTPS evades the firewall sensors in many cases.
Options B and E are the most likely to establish a shell successfully, as they use alternative communication channels (HTTP and HTTPS) that are less likely to be blocked by network devices. Option A and C use the standard TCP protocol, which may be more easily detected and blocked by network devices. Option D may also be detected and blocked by network devices since it relies on the PowerShell interpreter. Based on the given options, option E is the most likely to establish a shell successfully, as it uses an encrypted communication channel that is less likely to be detected and blocked by network devices.
I think your right
Q-211 and Q-212 share your answer and idea
eeeeeeeeeeee
A is correct
In scenarios where Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS) or next-generation firewalls might be filtering or blocking traffic, using encrypted or obfuscated channels may help evade detection. Among the options provided, the payload that uses HTTPS (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure) will most likely evade simple detection techniques, as the communication will be encrypted. So the correct answer is: E. windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https
See link for excellent explaination. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51590706/what-are-the-benefits-of-http-reverse-shell-over-tcp-reverse-shell
Great reference. This link is very informative and helps illuminate why E. windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https is a better answer. It's unlikely to be auto-filtered, and it's stealthier. A lot of the explanations for Answer A are just recycled answers from other test dumps.
I think A is correct answer
Given the scenario where a penetration tester suspects that a network device such as an IPS (Intrusion Prevention System) or next-generation firewall is dropping the connection, the payload most likely to establish a shell successfully would be one that uses a protocol less likely to be blocked or monitored. In this case, HTTP or HTTPS protocols, which are commonly allowed through firewalls and less likely to raise alarms, would be preferable. The most appropriate payloads would be: B. windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_http E. windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https
From github: windows/meterpreter/reverse_https is a unique Windows payload for Metasploit Framework. It is capable of doing things like remotely control the file system, sniff, keylog, hashdump, pivoting, run extensions, etc. But the real strength of this is the way it talks to the attacker. Instead of a stream-based communication model (tied to a specific TCP session), the stager provides a packet-based transaction system instead. You know, kind of like a botnet that we see today. The use of HTTPS also makes the payload communication a little bit harder to detect.
E. https reverse shell would avoid simple signature-based detection mechanisms
The answer is E. windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https. If the penetration tester suspects that a network device like an IPS or next-generation firewall is dropping the connection, using a payload with SSL/TLS encryption may help evade detection. The windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https payload is a good choice for this scenario, as it provides a reverse HTTPS meterpreter shell that uses SSL/TLS encryption to communicate between the attacker and the target. This payload is less likely to be detected and dropped by a network device, as it uses the standard HTTPS protocol that is commonly allowed through firewalls.
If a network device like an IPS or next-generation firewall is blocking the connection, then the best option is to use a payload that is less likely to be detected by these devices. Payloads that use HTTPS or HTTP are often less likely to be blocked, as these protocols are commonly used for legitimate web traffic. Therefore, option E, windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_https, is the most likely to establish a shell successfully. This payload uses the HTTPS protocol to establish a connection with the attacker's machine, which may help bypass network security devices. more info - It's unlikely to be auto-filtered It's stealthier.
Windows/x64/powershell_reverse_tcp is a payload used to establish a remote connection between an attacker and the target server using the Windows PowerShell scripting language. This type of connection is useful for executing commands remotely and transferring files, but it also relies on a web server to initiate the connection, making it more likely to be blocked by network devices.
C. windows/x64/shell_reverse_tcp is the most likely to establish a shell successfully. This payload utilizes the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) to create a connection between the attacker and the target server, allowing the attacker to interact with the shell. As this type of connection does not rely on a web server to initiate the connection, it is less likely to be blocked by a network device, making it the best choice for the situation.
I think A is correct answer
windows/x64/meterpreter/reverse_tcp, is less likely to be successful because it is designed for outbound connections, and may not be able to bypass the firewall or IPS that is blocking the connection.
Which answer is correct 100% ?
A is correct E is wrong answer
A is the correct answer
Windows Interactive Powershell Session, Reverse TCP - Metasploit https://www.infosecmatter.com/metasploit-module-library/?mm=payload/windows/x64/powershell_reverse_tcp
A is the answer
D is the Answer Read Again
A is correct you answer is wrong Try Hack Me lab is answer A