Jump to content

Modules Backwards Compatibility For Wifi MK VII?


Recommended Posts

Is there a way to import modules from wifi pineapple nano or tetra to mark 7? 

Is there a way to get it backwards compatible? Anything I can do to make them work on my mk7 or how to give it as feedback to devs?

As far as I know from quick searches, there is a GitHub pages for modules, for nano/tetra:


which have a significant amount of modules, compared to the MK7 module:


Therefore, I want to know is there a way to import those and make them work to some extent on my end, on my mark7. If not I wish to ask devs of wifi pineapple mk7 to try making backwards compatibility for modules a thing or give bigger initiative for module development. As they are there, but not quite compatible or not able to add them in an obvious way. So I want to suggest that perhaps using what's already there, instead of starting from scratch is a better way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no backward compatibility between the Mark VII and previous generations of the Pineapple and my guess is that it will never be because of the architecture behind it all.

The modules are community developed and not a "product" of Hak5 so the official devs at Hak5 are not responsible of upgrading modules to the Mark VII, the original contributors are (well, they have no responsibility really, they do it if they want to).

There's no "quantity beats quality" when it comes to the amount of modules available. Just because the repo for the Nano/Tetra is larger in numbers doesn't mean that there's an actual lack of modules for the Mark VII. The lower number of available modules for the Mark VII is because (for example);
- some older modules have been incorporated as standard functionality in the Mark VII
- not enough community devs have taken on the challenge to develop new modules (or upgrade already existing)
- some of the modules for the Nano/Tetra covers obsolete techniques that isn't relevant or applicable anymore for different reasons (most likely because of the fact that the security landscape has moved on and developed defenses for threats that was valid/working some years ago)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...