Chatterbox

No ports opened ? :(
tried too much .nmap is dead

«134567

Comments

  • I tried to think about this machine, but I don't have idea to how I gain access ... sad...

  • Keep at it with the scans. Nearly all ports are filtered, which makes nmap extremely slow. But some ports are open, you'll just take a while to find them.

    berninator
    Out of practice OSCP

  • @berninator said:
    Keep at it with the scans. Nearly all ports are filtered, which makes nmap extremely slow. But some ports are open, you'll just take a while to find them.

    Thanks, man... I see the ports hahah... more hints?

  • i cant find any :( wasted 3 hours with nmap :D hehe

  • i got the ports, just no idea what to do with them yet, dont try hitting the whole range at once

    fhlipZero

  • @estihex said:
    i cant find any :( wasted 3 hours with nmap :D hehe

    Don't scan all ports at once. Do a basic scan with port ranges. If you find open ports go for them with other options.

  • @druckk4mm3r like 1-1000, 1000-2000 ?

  • that box is boring.

    peek

  • Boring boring

    loganayala

  • Scan witn netcat ftw
  • i can not bufferoverflow in chatterbox. can u hint me. what do i need? i found exploit but not work..

  • if someone could pm me to talk about the initial exploit that would be great.

  • @kimbilirkim said:
    i can not bufferoverflow in chatterbox. can u hint me. what do i need? i found exploit but not work..

    I think this has something to do with the OS version. I also found it, but noticed that the exploit works up to an irrelevant version.

  • can someone tell me the prots .. its taking too long i wasted 3 hours before and 2 hours today i dont know what the thing in wrong.

  • you cant get a shell if someone is already using a shell....you can wait 3 days for nothing...or cheat with somone to run your powershell line there. in any case that box sucks.

    peek

  • @peek said:
    you cant get a shell if someone is already using a shell....you can wait 3 days for nothing...or cheat with somone to run your powershell line there. in any case that box sucks.

    Hey there,

    So you're saying that if we found the ports and attempted exploiting it properly but failed, it's because of the environment? How did people get that reverse shell then? They were just lucky?

  • yep, do a reset then exploit...

    peek

  • [-] Exploit failed: No encoders encoded the buffer successfully
    can somebody help please?

  • @h4x3r said:
    [-] Exploit failed: No encoders encoded the buffer successfully
    can somebody help please?

    try another payload

    peek

  • metasploit sucks ......try some others

    Agent22

  • you should reset the box before trying to pwn

    r4bit

  • @peek said:

    @h4x3r said:
    [-] Exploit failed: No encoders encoded the buffer successfully
    can somebody help please?

    try another payload

    @peek i found the right py payload but how to set PAYLOAD location of py file? it says the value of payload is wrong

  • I Changed the payload and got Exploit Completed but no session was created !

  • So, I ran a bunch of port scans on this using netcat, 1 - 65355 at the speed of one port per second. Taken around 18 hours and turned up a very small number of ports. Is this normal behavior for this box? Guessing it is, but just need a sanity check.

    Apologies to the small mass of folks who have wrote to me over the last 3-4 months. I've been on hiatus from HTB until very recently.

    Imagel

  • @CtrlEsc said:
    So, I ran a bunch of port scans on this using netcat, 1 - 65355 at the speed of one port per second. Taken around 18 hours and turned up a very small number of ports. Is this normal behavior for this box? Guessing it is, but just need a sanity check.

    One port per second? I used -T5 on my nmap and had full scan done in ~ few mins. and Yes this machine is set to filter almost every port

    Hack The Box
    OSCP - www.bulbafett.com

  • @bulbafett said:
    One port per second? I used -T5 on my nmap and had full scan done in ~ few mins. and Yes this machine is set to filter almost every port

    At the outset, I tried the standard set of nmap scans, a full UDP scan and some staggered TCP scans. I got literally nothing, hence the netcat approach - slow and steady. Not sure what the heck is going on here.

    What is our mantra? "Try Harder". So I guess that is what I will do. :+1:

    Apologies to the small mass of folks who have wrote to me over the last 3-4 months. I've been on hiatus from HTB until very recently.

    Imagel

  • @CtrlEsc said:

    @bulbafett said:
    One port per second? I used -T5 on my nmap and had full scan done in ~ few mins. and Yes this machine is set to filter almost every port

    At the outset, I tried the standard set of nmap scans, a full UDP scan and some staggered TCP scans. I got literally nothing, hence the netcat approach - slow and steady. Not sure what the heck is going on here.

    What is our mantra? "Try Harder". So I guess that is what I will do. :+1:

    For a machine like this, I'd recommend doing a quick scan for any responding port then go back and actually try to enumerate any responding ports will save you a TON of time

    Hack The Box
    OSCP - www.bulbafett.com

  • The design of the machine i awful. The required resets and unstable shells makes Chatterbox unpleasant experience. By my opinion the box should be fixed and activated again.

Sign In to comment.