PAGES
← all tools
◆ Reconnaissance & OSINT

sipvicious

v0.3.4 open-source

Set of cyber tools to audit SIP-based VoIP systems by scanning for SIP servers, enumerating extensions, and cracking passwords.

Summary

sipvicious is an open-source suite of command-line tools for auditing SIP-based VoIP systems, free to use and run directly from a terminal. It bundles svmap to sweep IP ranges for SIP servers, svwar to enumerate working extensions and check whether they require authentication, and svcrack to brute-force passwords via digest authentication using numeric ranges or dictionary files, with svreport tying session data together. It is aimed at penetration testers and VoIP administrators checking their own infrastructure rather than general network scanning teams. First committed in 2007 and still maintained by a small group of seven contributors, with 17 commits and four releases in the past year, the most recent just 42 days ago.

Set of cyber tools to audit SIP-based VoIP systems by scanning for SIP servers, enumerating extensions, and cracking passwords.

How sipvicious helps

Which hosts on this network are actually running SIP servers?

sweeps a given range of IP addresses and ports and reports back every host that answers as a SIP server

Which extensions on this PBX could an attacker register as?

probes each extension line to see if it can be registered and lists which ones succeed

Do my extension lines require authentication before they can be used?

checks each discovered extension and reports whether registration succeeds without credentials

How weak are the passwords protecting my registrar or proxy?

runs digest authentication attempts against each account using a numeric range or a dictionary file and reports which ones succeed

Can I tell whether last week's scan and this week's scan found the same accounts?

ties together the session data recorded by the scanning, enumeration and cracking runs so results can be compared or reviewed together

Will my scan reach SIP servers that only have an IPv6 address?

accepts bare or bracketed IPv6 literals as targets so hosts without an IPv4 address are still covered

Languages

Not documented

Score card

  1. Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
  2. Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
  3. Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
  4. Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
  5. Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
  6. Community health
  7. Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
  8. Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
  9. Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
  10. Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply

Nine scores for sipvicious, 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 →

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 sipvicious 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…

Explore the full chart →

Website history

enablesecurity.com, every change

Enable Security's home page and 12 more pages as they looked each month from November 2021 to October 2026: 27 renders, 4 changes of tagline or palette. Step through them, play them, or put any two months side by side.

Website history is included with Researcher and Business.

See plans →

Releases

4 entries

  1. June 20211
  2. March 20212
  3. March 20201

    4 entries

    Project health

    Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in EnableSecurity/sipvicious, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.

    1. Contributors 1 ±0 vs prior 12 months
    2. Maintainers 1 +1 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
    3. Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
    4. Community-filed 100% of issues opened, last 12 months
    5. Median time to close 32 days first maintainer reply 2.9 days
    6. Open backlog 0 of 61 issues ever filed
    1. Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
    2. Open backlog 0
    3. Contributors / month 0
    4. Commits / month 0
    5. Stars 1,102
    Issue themes, last 12 months
    • bugs 33%
    • other 67%

    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.

    Tracked by Cyber Toolchain Choose a badge style and copy the code →
    browse all tools → score card for your toolchain →