Talk:Metasploit

message: 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.
* It's not listed here: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical
* It's not listed here: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html
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)
thread_title:  Open Source? Who says? 

message: 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
:Controversy sections are generally considered to be a bad thing nowadays.  Controversies and other issues should be worked into the article as a whole, not forced into a dedicated section.  And you need better sources; the one you linked doesn't say what you claim.  It describes how Liu is trying to prove that anti-forensics make much existing thought about digital forensics invalid.  But his point is that the exploits already exist -- he's not the one creating them, and criminals would still be able to use them even without his work.  If a criminal used such an exploit to frame you for a cybercrime, you would be glad that Liu has highlighted you and let you cite those vulnerabilities in your defense. --Aquillion (talk) 16:53, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: See this news article, or the Metasploit blog  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.58.103 (talk) 17:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rapid7 - Metasploit takeover 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070107145900/https://archives.neohapsis.com:80/archives/vulnwatch/2005-q4/0074.html to http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/vulnwatch/2005-q4/0074.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:08, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Self metasploit? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Meterpreter commands 

message: Should there be a new page for Rapid7 the company?
--XtinaS (talk) 14:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's sources to support it. CanadianOtaku Talk Page 21:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  New page for Rapid7 itself?