+- Sinisterly (https://sinister.ly)
+-- Forum: Computers (https://sinister.ly/Forum-Computers)
+--- Forum: Operating Systems (https://sinister.ly/Forum-Operating-Systems)
+--- Thread: Backtrack vs. Kali (/Thread-Backtrack-vs-Kali)
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - Ultimatum - 09-06-2013
(09-05-2013, 12:30 PM)Oni Wrote: Not exactly. There's a few characteristics that might cause people to prefer one over the other. As I mentioned, one of those characteristics would be the distribution they are based off of. Kali is based on Debian, while Backtrack is based on Ubuntu. I know a few people that are still using Backtrack, even though I suggested Kali. People have their reasons, I guess.
That is true, the developers did change the distribution; then again, they are both really good penetration testing tools.
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - Cyanide and Cynicism - 09-12-2013
I don't see the use of using a pen-testing distro like Kali or Backbox, since you wont use a large percentage of the tools on it and they generally have bloat. If you're going to use it on a live-cd then why not use a more secure distro like Whonix or TAILs and just install the tools you'll use?
And why do people prefer Backtrack? Backtrack is simply an older, buggier version with older packages.
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - w00t - 09-12-2013
Using Tor != more secure. More anonymous, yes.
Kali/BackBox and Tails( IDK about Whonix ) share much of the same codebase, being both debian derivatives, so their security outlooks are pretty much the same.
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - Cyanide and Cynicism - 09-12-2013
(09-12-2013, 07:23 AM)w00t Wrote: Using Tor != more secure. More anonymous, yes.
More secure from being v&, which is what I'm talking about.
Quote:Kali/BackBox and Tails( IDK about Whonix ) share much of the same codebase, being both debian derivatives, so their security outlooks are pretty much the same.
Sure they're both Debian derivatives, but that doesn't mean they're Debian copies. A distro based off of another (Funtoo, Ubuntu, etc) can be very different than the one it's based off of.
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - Oni - 09-12-2013
(09-12-2013, 03:25 AM)Cyanide and Cynicism Wrote: I don't see the use of using a pen-testing distro like Kali or Backbox, since you wont use a large percentage of the tools on it and they generally have bloat. If you're going to use it on a live-cd then why not use a more secure distro like Whonix or TAILs and just install the tools you'll use?
And why do people prefer Backtrack? Backtrack is simply an older, buggier version with older packages.
Some people prefer Ubuntu or dislike Debian. I've talked to a few people that didn't even know about Kali. If you have the time, you could certainly grab the tools on another distribution rather than use a live-disk. However, I think you'll find that very few people would want to use Whonix or TAILs on a day to day basis. Users would much rather download a semi-bloated live-disk and run it off their pendrive.
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - Cressi - 09-12-2013
I use Backtrack 5 with my own modifications on the programs and the GUI.
Never really liked Kali, but should maybe try it out ^^
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - Silky - 09-15-2013
I chose Kali for the very same reason it's Debian. Also the images; they have an image for the Galaxy Note and you can never go wrong with Raspberry Pi.
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - The_Joker - 10-04-2013
Kali because its newer (shiny!!!), and its Debian based instead of Ubuntu.
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - w00t - 10-05-2013
You do realize Ubuntu is Debian based, right?
RE: Backtrack vs. Kali - Nefarious - 10-05-2013
(10-04-2013, 07:34 PM)The_Joker Wrote: Kali because its newer (shiny!!!)
That's a horrible idea to use something.