How I tested Core Impact 3.1

During testing, I was primarily concerned with how well the different exploit modules worked together and integrated with third party products, as well as Core Impact’s documentation, customizability, and ease of use.

Core Impact 3.1’s requirements are pretty straightforward compared to Version 2, which required a Windows 2000 machine for my testing. I did notice that Core tested the exploit modules within Core Impact on a variety of OSes, including versions of Solaris, Linux, OpenBSD, and Windows 2000, which closely mimicked my own testing. I installed the product on a Dell Latitude C640 running Windows XP without a problem.

After gathering the appropriate written permissions from our clients, I tested small to midsize heterogeneous internetworks for exploitable vulnerabilities. Although Core Impact was nearly useless when testing perimeter defenses, I found it useful when scanning, footprinting, and attacking machines inside the perimeter.

Also, because Impact’s tools and exploit modules are written in the Python programming language, it would be easy to modify modules to add your own exploits or to add tools.

In terms of suitability, Core Impact is well designed for streamlining the consistent testing and auditing of host vulnerabilities with its detailed logging of events. The ability to check for new module exploits at Core via the Web is a nice touch, and I also found the integration with Nmap, Nessus, and L0phtcrack useful to create, add, or change displayed hosts and properties.