fix(tests): remove nonexistent safe_shares and fix mssql_dumper module name in e2e tests

[Marshall-Hallenbeck]

Description

Fix 6 guaranteed e2e test failures caused by stale module references in tests/e2e_commands.txt:

1. safe_shares (lines 155-157): This module never existed in the codebase. No git history, no deleted file. These 3 test lines always fail with "invalid choice."
2. mssql-dumper (lines 303-305): The actual module name is mssql_dumper (underscore, not hyphen). These 3 test lines always fail with "invalid choice."

This PR was created with the assistance of AI (Claude Code — identified the stale references during e2e test runs, verified fixes, authored the commit and PR).

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Deprecation of feature or functionality
• This change requires a documentation update
• This requires a third party update (such as Impacket, Dploot, lsassy, etc)
• This PR was created with the assistance of AI (list what type of assistance, tool(s)/model(s) in the description)

Setup guide for the review

Run the full e2e test suite against any Windows target with MSSQL:

# Before this fix: 6 guaranteed failures
poetry run python tests/e2e_tests.py -t <target> -u <user> -p <pass> --protocols smb mssql -e

# After this fix: mssql_dumper lines pass, safe_shares lines removed
poetry run python tests/e2e_tests.py -t <target> -u <user> -p <pass> --protocols mssql --line-nums "300-302" -v

Tested against: Windows Server 2016 DC (192.168.8.96, hacklab.ing domain), Python 3.13.14, Kali Linux.

Screenshots (if appropriate):

N/A — text-only test output change.

Checklist:

• I have ran Ruff against my changes (poetry: poetry run ruff check ., use --fix to automatically fix what it can)
• I have added or updated the tests/e2e_commands.txt file if necessary (new modules or features are required to be added to the e2e tests)
• If reliant on changes of third party dependencies, such as Impacket, dploot, lsassy, etc, I have linked the relevant PRs in those projects
• I have linked relevant sources that describes the added technique (blog posts, documentation, etc)
• I have performed a self-review of my own code (not an AI review)
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation (PR here: https://github.com/Pennyw0rth/NetExec-Wiki)

[github-actions]

It looks like the PR template may not have been filled out. The following sections appear to be missing:

• Description

• Type of change

• Setup guide for the review

• Checklist

Please edit your PR description to include them. The template helps reviewers understand and test your changes. Thanks!

[NeffIsBack]

It looks like the PR template may not have been filled out. The following sections appear to be missing:

• Description

• Type of change

• Setup guide for the review

• Checklist

Please edit your PR description to include them. The template helps reviewers understand and test your changes. Thanks!

@Marshall-Hallenbeck the PR checker strikes back hahaha

[Marshall-Hallenbeck]

I had AI file it of course it ignored our template 😂😂😂