From afd0e7145735a357fb94ce0a5d71e7f29a9a7a64 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: sinn3r Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 13:50:23 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Use the term "exploit" is a little more correctly So Metasploit uses the term "exploit" to describe something, a module or an action, that results popping a shell. A check normally doesn't pop a shell, so avoid that language. --- lib/msf/core/exploit.rb | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/msf/core/exploit.rb b/lib/msf/core/exploit.rb index 1172c98151..61f6b94cad 100644 --- a/lib/msf/core/exploit.rb +++ b/lib/msf/core/exploit.rb @@ -95,8 +95,8 @@ class Exploit < Msf::Module Appears = [ 'appears', "The target appears to be vulnerable." ] # - # The target is vulnerable. Only used if the check is able to actually exploit the bug, - # and obtain hard evidence. For example: executing a command on the target machine, and + # The target is vulnerable. Only used if the check is able to actually take advantage of the + # bug, and obtain hard evidence. For example: executing a command on the target machine, and # retrieve the output. # Vulnerable = [ 'vulnerable', "The target is vulnerable." ]