EMBA
v2.0.5-ice-edt open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on EMBA's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
EMBA - The firmware security analyzer
./emba -l ~/log -f ~/firmware emba -i firmware1.bin -o firmware2.bin ./emba -k /path/to/kernel/config emba -p <path_to_firmware> --steps s115 emba -p <path_to_firmware> --steps p35,s02 emba -p <path_to_firmware> --steps f21 emba -e <firmware_image> -Q emba -e <firmware_image> -B
Summary
EMBA is an open-source, GPLv3-licensed command-line tool for analyzing embedded device firmware, aimed at penetration testers, product security teams, developers and product managers rather than general application security staff. Given a firmware image, it handles extraction, static and dynamic analysis through emulation, and SBOMSBOMA software bill of materials, an inventory of the components and versions inside an application. It helps teams find affected software when a dependency has a vulnerability or licensing issue. generation, then produces a web-based report flagging weak spots such as insecure binaries, outdated components, risky scripts and hard-coded passwords; live analysis can even reach older devices by supporting legacy SSLSSLA cryptographic protocol for encrypting network connections, now deprecated in favor of TLS but whose name persists colloquially. Cyber tools reference it when handling HTTPS or other encrypted-channel inspection and termination./TLS ciphers that current OpenSSL refuses. It sits in the firmware reverse-engineering and IoTIoTA collective label for internet-connected physical devices — sensors, cameras, routers, appliances — that tools target because they run embedded firmware with limited patching and broad network exposure. security space, covering ground that otherwise means stitching together separate extraction, static-analysis and SBOM tools by hand. Development is active, with 711 commits and 17 releases in the past year and a release only 31 days old.
EMBA - The firmware security analyzer
How EMBA helps
What is actually inside this firmware image, down to the component and version level?
extracts the filesystem and generates an SBOM listing binaries, libraries and their versions, so outdated or unknown components stand out
Which binaries in this firmware were built without standard hardening protections?
statically inspects extracted binaries for missing exploit mitigations and flags each one by path and the protection it lacks
Are there hard-coded passwords or keys buried in this firmware?
scans extracted filesystems and configuration files for embedded credentials and cryptographic material and reports where each was found
Does this device still respond once it is actually running, not just sitting on disk?
emulates the firmware and performs dynamic analysis against the running system, including live checks that work by supporting older SSL/TLS ciphers current OpenSSL refuses
Which components in this firmware carry known CVEs?
matches the identified software components and versions against vulnerability databases and lists the matches against the SBOM it built
Which scripts on this device carry risky shell logic?
runs static checks over extracted shell scripts and flags dangerous constructs and risky patterns by file
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Screenshots
From the release notes, newest first. Click one to see it full size.Media
Videos from the release notes, newest first. They play right here.Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for EMBA, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail EMBA puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
26 entries
No entries match these filters.
- November 20261
- September 20261
- July 20261
- June 20261
- April 20261
- December 20251
- March 20251
- December 20241
- October 20241
- August 20241
- June 20241
- March 20241
- December 20231
- November 20231
- July 20231
- May 20231
- March 20231
- February 20231
- December 20221
- October 20222
- August 20222
- July 20222
- June 20221
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in e-m-b-a/emba, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 13 −2 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 2 +0 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 65% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 15 days first maintainer reply 7.2 hours
- Open backlog 13 of 372 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 13
- Contributors / month 3
- Commits / month 80
- Stars 3,666
- bugs 39%
- features 24%
- questions 7%
- docs 2%
- other 28%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Libraries its release ships
What its latest release locks, checked against known advisories.None of its release's images build from a lockfile we can read.
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.