I had to keep guessing at how much you actually know about this stuff, but given you brought up the workers as a constraint means you are either completely clueless and/or have absolutely 0 intention to think for yourself.
No 'proofs' like "demonstrate on someone else's server" or explanation of the exploit chain will ever be enough to convince you.
You dont want "a working exploit" - and we could have all saved some time if you were honest: You don't know what you're talking about and only after being given a complete exploit you can run against any target will you consider it easy by your standards.
Good talk. By your definition of easy, i can easily agree this exploit is not very easy. Though the settings dont matter/can be bisected remotely, you're right that - afaik - nobody has figured out how to avoid guessing the compile settings and version. Thus compiling it with custom settings is going to keep you safer in practice, while using a container is more dangerous.
I had to keep guessing at how much you actually know about this stuff, but given you brought up the workers as a constraint means you are either completely clueless and/or have absolutely 0 intention to think for yourself.
No 'proofs' like "demonstrate on someone else's server" or explanation of the exploit chain will ever be enough to convince you.
You dont want "a working exploit" - and we could have all saved some time if you were honest: You don't know what you're talking about and only after being given a complete exploit you can run against any target will you consider it easy by your standards.
Good talk. By your definition of easy, i can easily agree this exploit is not very easy. Though the settings dont matter/can be bisected remotely, you're right that - afaik - nobody has figured out how to avoid guessing the compile settings and version. Thus compiling it with custom settings is going to keep you safer in practice, while using a container is more dangerous.