fern-wifi-cracker
open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on fern-wifi-cracker's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
Wireless security auditing tool that cracks and recovers WEP/WPAWPAA Wi-Fi authentication and encryption standard maintained by the Wi-Fi Alliance, replacing WEP; cyber tools target it to audit wireless network credentials and key exchange handshakes./WPS keys and runs network-based attacks on wireless or ethernet networks.
Summary
fern-wifi-cracker is an open-source wireless security auditing tool, built with Python and Qt, that cracks and recovers WEP/WPA/WPS keys and runs other attacks against wireless or Ethernet networks. It is a desktop GUIGUIA graphical user interface, controls such as windows, buttons and menus. It lets people use software visually rather than entering commands. application launched from a Linux machine, built on top of Aircrack-NG, Reaver, and Scapy, and its README lists KDE/GNOME, BackTrack, and BackBox as tested environments, so it targets penetration testers and network owners auditing their own wireless infrastructure rather than developers integrating scanning into a pipeline. It sits in the wireless-security category alongside dedicated WEP/WPA cracking suites, offering a GUI over functions people otherwise drive from the Aircrack-NG command line, and a paid professional version is offered separately. The project dates to 2010 with 16 contributors, but only one commit in the past year signals a slow-moving codebase, despite a release cut 132 days ago.
Wireless security auditing tool that cracks and recovers WEP/WPA/WPS keys and runs network-based attacks on wireless or ethernet networks.
How fern-wifi-cracker helps
Which of my wireless networks are actually vulnerable to a WEP or WPA key recovery attack?
runs Fragmentation, Chop-Chop, Caffe-Latte, Hirte, ARP Request Replay, or WPS-based attacks against the target and recovers the key if the attack succeeds, saving it to a database
Is my WPS-enabled access point exposed to a PIN attack?
drives a WPS attack through the bundled Reaver integration and reports whether the key was recovered
Where is a rogue or attacking access point physically located?
tracks the MAC address of an access point and geolocates it
Can traffic on my network be intercepted between two endpoints?
offers passive and Ethernet session hijacking along with an internal MITM engine to capture sessions crossing the network
Languages
Command line
| 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.
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 fern-wifi-cracker, 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 fern-wifi-cracker 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
Nothing shipped since we started watching. Releases and docs updates land here as they happen.
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in savio-code/fern-wifi-cracker, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 1 +1 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 0 +0 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 0 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 100% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 2.1 years issues closed, last 12 months
- Open backlog 166 of 188 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 166
- Contributors / month 0
- Commits / month 0
- Stars 1,601
- other 100%
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.
Choose a badge style and copy the code →