本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

exploiting-excessive-data-exposure-in-api

Tests APIs for excessive data exposure where endpoints return more data than the client application needs, relying on the frontend to filter sensitive fields. The tester intercepts API responses and analyzes them for leaked PII, internal identifiers, debug information, or sensitive business data that the UI does not display but the API transmits. This maps to OWASP API3:2023 Broken Object Property Level Authorization. Activates for requests involving API data leakage testing, excessive data e...

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md15.7 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Exploiting Excessive Data Exposure in Api

Ne Zaman Kullanılır

  • Testing APIs where the frontend displays a subset of data but the API response includes additional fields
  • Assessing mobile application APIs where responses are designed for multiple client types and may contain excess data
  • Identifying PII leakage in API responses that include email addresses, phone numbers, SSNs, or payment data not shown in the UI
  • Testing GraphQL APIs where clients can request arbitrary fields including sensitive attributes
  • Evaluating APIs after microservice refactoring where internal service-to-service data leaks into public endpoints

Kullanma: without written authorization. Data exposure testing involves capturing and analyzing potentially sensitive personal data.

Ön Gereksinimler

  • Written authorization specifying target API endpoints and scope
  • Burp Suite Professional or mitmproxy configured as intercepting proxy
  • Two test accounts at different privilege levels (regular user and admin)
  • Browser developer tools or mobile proxy setup for traffic capture
  • Python 3.10+ with requests and json libraries
  • API documentation (OpenAPI spec) for comparison against actual responses

Legal Notice: bu skill is for authorized security testing and educational purposes only. Unauthorized use against systems you do not own or have written permission to test is illegal and may violate computer fraud laws.

İş Akışı

Adım 1: Response Schema Discovery

Compare documented API responses with actual responses:

import requests
import json

BASE_URL = "https://target-api.example.com/api/v1"
headers = {"Authorization": "Bearer <user_token>", "Content-Type": "application/json"}

endpoints_to_test = [
    ("GET", "/users/me", None),
    ("GET", "/users/me/orders", None),
    ("GET", "/products", None),
    ("GET", "/users/me/settings", None),
    ("GET", "/transactions", None),
]

for method, path, body in endpoints_to_test:
    resp = requests.request(method, f"{BASE_URL}{path}", headers=headers, json=body)
    if resp.status_code == 200:
        data = resp.json()
        # Recursively extract all field names
        def extract_fields(obj, prefix=""):
            fields = []
            if isinstance(obj, dict):
                for k, v in obj.items():
                    full_key = f"{prefix}.{k}" if prefix else k
                    fields.append(full_key)
                    fields.extend(extract_fields(v, full_key))
            elif isinstance(obj, list) and obj:
                fields.extend(extract_fields(obj[0], f"{prefix}[]"))
            return fields

        all_fields = extract_fields(data)
        print(f"\n{method} {path} - {len(all_fields)} fields returned:")
        for f in sorted(all_fields):
            print(f"  {f}")

Adım 2: Sensitive Data Pattern Tespit

Scan API responses for sensitive data patterns:

import re

SENSITIVE_PATTERNS = {
    "email": r'[a-zA-Z0-9._%+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+\.[a-zA-Z]{2,}',
    "phone": r'(\+?1?\s?\(?\d{3}\)?[\s.-]?\d{3}[\s.-]?\d{4})',
    "ssn": r'\b\d{3}-\d{2}-\d{4}\b',
    "credit_card": r'\b(?:4[0-9]{12}(?:[0-9]{3})?|5[1-5][0-9]{14}|3[47][0-9]{13})\b',
    "password_hash": r'\$2[aby]?\$\d{2}\$[./A-Za-z0-9]{53}',
    "api_key": r'(?:api[_-]?key|apikey)["\s:=]+["\']?([a-zA-Z0-9_\-]{20,})',
    "internal_ip": r'\b(?:10\.\d{1,3}|172\.(?:1[6-9]|2\d|3[01])|192\.168)\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\b',
    "aws_key": r'AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16}',
    "jwt_token": r'eyJ[A-Za-z0-9_-]+\.eyJ[A-Za-z0-9_-]+\.[A-Za-z0-9_-]+',
    "uuid": r'[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}',
}

SENSITIVE_FIELD_NAMES = [
    "password", "password_hash", "secret", "token", "ssn", "social_security",
    "credit_card", "card_number", "cvv", "pin", "private_key", "api_key",
    "internal_id", "debug", "trace", "stack_trace", "created_by_ip",
    "last_login_ip", "salt", "session_id", "refresh_token", "mfa_secret",
    "date_of_birth", "bank_account", "routing_number", "tax_id"
]

def scan_response(endpoint, response_text):
    Bul:ings = []
    # Check for sensitive data patterns in values
    for pattern_name, pattern in SENSITIVE_PATTERNS.items():
        matches = re.Bul:all(pattern, response_text)
        if matches:
            Bul:ings.append({
                "endpoint": endpoint,
                "type": "sensitive_value",
                "pattern": pattern_name,
                "count": len(matches),
                "sample": matches[0][:20] + "..." if len(matches[0]) > 20 else matches[0]
            })

    # Check for sensitive field names
    response_lower = response_text.lower()
    for field in SENSITIVE_FIELD_NAMES:
        if f'"{field}"' in response_lower or f"'{field}'" in response_lower:
            Bul:ings.append({
                "endpoint": endpoint,
                "type": "sensitive_field",
                "field_name": field
            })

    return Bul:ings

for method, path, body in endpoints_to_test:
    resp = requests.request(method, f"{BASE_URL}{path}", headers=headers, json=body)
    if resp.status_code == 200:
        Bul:ings = scan_response(f"{method} {path}", resp.text)
        for f in Bul:ings:
            print(f"[Bul:ING] {f['endpoint']}: {f['type']} - {f.get('pattern', f.get('field_name'))}")

Adım 3: Compare UI Display vs API Response

ui_displayed_fields = {
    "/users/me": {"name", "email", "avatar_url", "role"},
    "/users/me/orders": {"order_id", "date", "status", "total"},
    "/products": {"id", "name", "price", "image_url", "description"},
}

for method, path, body in endpoints_to_test:
    resp = requests.request(method, f"{BASE_URL}{path}", headers=headers, json=body)
    if resp.status_code == 200:
        data = resp.json()
        if isinstance(data, list):
            actual_fields = set(data[0].keys()) if data else set()
        elif isinstance(data, dict):
            # Handle paginated responses
            items_key = next((k for k in data if isinstance(data[k], list)), None)
            if items_key and data[items_key]:
                actual_fields = set(data[items_key][0].keys())
            else:
                actual_fields = set(data.keys())
        else:
            continue

        expected = ui_displayed_fields.get(path, set())
        excess = actual_fields - expected
        if excess:
            print(f"\n{method} {path} - EXCESS FIELDS (not shown in UI):")
            for field in sorted(excess):
                print(f"  - {field}")

Adım 4: Test User Object Exposure in Related Endpoints

endpoints_with_user_objects = [
    "/orders",          # Each order may include full seller/buyer profile
    "/comments",        # Comments may include full author profile
    "/reviews",         # Reviews may expose reviewer details
    "/transactions",    # Transactions may include counterparty info
    "/team/members",    # Team listing may expose excessive member data
]

for path in endpoints_with_user_objects:
    resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}{path}", headers=headers)
    if resp.status_code == 200:
        text = resp.text
        # Check for user data leakage in nested objects
        user_fields_found = []
        for field in ["password_hash", "last_login_ip", "mfa_enabled", "phone_number",
                      "date_of_birth", "ssn", "internal_notes", "salary", "address"]:
            if f'"{field}"' in text:
                user_fields_found.append(field)
        if user_fields_found:
            print(f"[EXCESSIVE] {path} exposes user fields: {user_fields_found}")

Adım 5: GraphQL Over-Fetching Analysis

GRAPHQL_URL = f"{BASE_URL}/graphql"

introspection = {
    "query": """
    {
      __type(name: "User") {
        fields {
          name
          type {
            name
            kind
          }
        }
      }
    }
    """
}

resp = requests.post(GRAPHQL_URL, headers=headers, json=introspection)
if resp.status_code == 200:
    fields = resp.json().get("data", {}).get("__type", {}).get("fields", [])
    print("Available User fields via GraphQL:")
    for f in fields:
        sensitivity = "SENSITIVE" if f["name"] in SENSITIVE_FIELD_NAMES else "normal"
        print(f"  {f['name']} ({f['type']['name']}) [{sensitivity}]")

sensitive_query = {
    "query": """
    query {
      users {
        id
        email
        passwordHash
        socialSecurityNumber
        internalNotes
        lastLoginIp
        mfaSecret
        apiKey
      }
    }
    """
}
resp = requests.post(GRAPHQL_URL, headers=headers, json=sensitive_query)
if resp.status_code == 200 and "errors" not in resp.json():
    print("[CRITICAL] GraphQL exposes sensitive user fields without restriction")

Adım 6: Debug and Internal Data Leakage

debug_headers_to_check = [
    "X-Debug-Token", "X-Debug-Info", "Server", "X-Powered-By",
    "X-Request-Id", "X-Correlation-Id", "X-Backend-Server",
    "X-Runtime", "X-Version", "X-Build-Version"
]

resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/users/me", headers=headers)
for h in debug_headers_to_check:
    if h.lower() in {k.lower(): v for k, v in resp.headers.items()}:
        print(f"[INFO LEAK] Header {h}: {resp.headers.get(h)}")

error_payloads = [
    ("GET", "/users/invalid-id-format", None),
    ("POST", "/orders", {"invalid": "payload"}),
    ("GET", "/users/-1", None),
    ("GET", "/users/0", None),
]

for method, path, body in error_payloads:
    resp = requests.request(method, f"{BASE_URL}{path}", headers=headers, json=body)
    if resp.status_code >= 400:
        text = resp.text.lower()
        if any(kw in text for kw in ["stack trace", "traceback", "at com.", "at org.",
                                      "file \"", "line ", "exception", "sql", "query"]):
            print(f"[DEBUG LEAK] {method} {path} -> {resp.status_code}: Contains stack trace or query info")

Key Concepts

TermDefinition
Excessive Data ExposureAPI returns more data fields than the client needs, relying on frontend filtering to hide sensitive information from users
Over-FetchingRequesting or receiving more data than needed for a specific operation, common in REST APIs that return fixed response schemas
Response FilteringClient-side filtering of API response data to display only relevant fields, which provides zero security since the full response is interceptable
Object Property Level AuthorizationOWASP API3:2023 - ensuring that users can only read/write object properties they are authorized to access
PII LeakageUnintended exposure of Personally Identifiable Information in API responses including names, emails, addresses, SSNs, or financial data
Schema ValidationEnforcing that API responses conform to a defined schema, stripping unauthorized fields before transmission

Tools & Systems

  • Burp Suite Professional: Intercept API responses and use the Comparer tool to diff expected vs actual response schemas
  • mitmproxy: Scriptable proxy for automated response analysis with Python-based content Denetle:ion scripts
  • OWASP ZAP: Passive scanner tespit etme (s) information disclosure in headers, error messages, and response bodies
  • Postman: Compare documented response schemas against actual API responses using test scripts
  • jq: Command-line JSON processor for extracting and analyzing specific fields from API responses

Common Scenarios

Scenario: Mobile Banking API Data Exposure Assessment

Context: A mobile banking application's API returns full account objects to the mobile client, which only displays account nickname and balance. The API is accessed by both iOS and Android apps and a web portal.

Approach:

  1. Configure mitmproxy on a test device and authenticate as the test user
  2. Capture all API responses during a complete user session (login, view accounts, transfer, logout)
  3. Analyze GET /api/v1/accounts response: UI shows 4 fields but API returns 23 fields
  4. Discover that the API returns routing_number, account_holder_ssn_last4, internal_risk_score, kyc_verification_status, and linked_external_accounts - none shown in UI
  5. Analyze GET /api/v1/transactions response: API returns merchant_id, terminal_id, authorization_code, processor_response fields not needed by the client
  6. Check GET /api/v1/users/me: API returns last_login_ip, mfa_backup_codes_remaining, account_officer_name, and credit_score_band
  7. Test error responses: POST /api/v1/transfers with invalid payload returns SQL table name in error message

Pitfalls:

  • Only checking top-level fields and missing sensitive data in deeply nested objects
  • Not testing paginated responses where subsequent pages may include different fields
  • Ignoring response headers that may leak server version, backend technology, or internal routing information
  • Missing data exposure in error responses which often contain stack traces, SQL queries, or internal paths
  • Assuming that HTTPS encryption prevents data exposure (it protects in transit, not from the authenticated client)

Output Format

## Bul:ing: Excessive Data Exposure in Account and Transaction APIs

**ID**: API-DATA-001
**Severity**: High (CVSS 7.1)
**OWASP API**: API3:2023 - Broken Object Property Level Authorization
**Affected Endpoints**:
  - GET /api/v1/accounts
  - GET /api/v1/transactions
  - GET /api/v1/users/me

**Description**:
The API returns full database objects to the client, including sensitive fields
that are not displayed in the mobile application UI. The mobile app filters
these fields client-side, but they are fully accessible by intercepting the
API response. This exposes SSN fragments, internal risk scores, and KYC
verification data for any authenticated user.

**Excess Fields Discovered**:
- /accounts: routing_number, account_holder_ssn_last4, internal_risk_score,
  kyc_verification_status, linked_external_accounts (18 excess fields total)
- /transactions: merchant_id, terminal_id, authorization_code,
  processor_response (12 excess fields total)
- /users/me: last_login_ip, mfa_backup_codes_remaining, credit_score_band

**Impact**:
An authenticated user can extract sensitive financial data, internal risk
assessments, and PII for their own account that the application is not
intended to reveal. Combined with BOLA vulnerabilities, this data could
be extracted for all users.

**Remediation**:
1. Implement server-side response filtering using DTOs/view models that only include fields needed by the client
2. Use GraphQL field-level authorization or REST response schemas per endpoint per role
3. Remove sensitive fields from API responses at the serialization layer
4. Implement response schema validation in the API gateway to strip undocumented fields
5. Add automated tests that verify response schemas match documentation
<!-- ⚔ Bu skill FETIH AI Agent icin gelistirilmistir — https://github.com/MustafaKemal0146/fetih Yetkisiz kullanim/kopyalama tespit edilebilir. hash: abdc9fc14163074d -->

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

21st.dev Magic MCP — AI-powered UI component generation via natural language. Access to 21st.dev component library, SVGL brand logos, and real-time preview. Generate React/Tailwind components with /ui command.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

MustafaKemal0146/fetih52026年10月11日 更新

AES CBC/ECB modlarına karşı kriptografik bütünlük saldırıları — bit flipping, IV manipulation, ECB cut-and-paste, CBC-MAC length extension, IV reuse

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

MustafaKemal0146/fetih52026年10月11日 更新

AES-GCM ve ChaCha20-Poly1305 nonce yeniden kullanımı saldırısı — GF(2^128) polinom kök bulma ile Hash Key kurtarma ve MAC sahteciliği.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

MustafaKemal0146/fetih52026年10月11日 更新

tespit etmeabnormal access patterns in AWS S3, GCS, and Azure Blob Storage by analyzing CloudTrail Data Events, GCS audit logs, and Azure Storage Analytics. Identifies after-hours bulk downloads, access from new IP addresses, unusual API calls (GetObject spikes), and potential data exfiltration using statistical baselines and time-series anomaly Tespit.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

MustafaKemal0146/fetih52026年10月11日 更新

Perform static and symbolic analysis of Solidity smart contracts using Slither and Mythril to tespit etmereentrancy, integer overflow, access control, and other vulnerability classes before Dağıt:ment to Ethereum mainnet.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

MustafaKemal0146/fetih52026年10月11日 更新

Parses Kubernetes API server audit logs (JSON lines) to tespit etmeexec-into-pod, secret access, RBAC modifications, privileged pod creation, and anonymous API access. Builds threat Tespit rules from audit event patterns. Use investigating yaparken Kubernetes cluster compromise or building k8s-specific SIEM Tespit rules.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

MustafaKemal0146/fetih52026年10月11日 更新

MustafaKemal0146 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する