Add content from: How An Authorization Flaw Reveals A Common Security Blind Sp...

This commit is contained in:
HackTricks News Bot 2025-10-01 12:59:24 +00:00
parent cd60902021
commit 373bbd0af0
2 changed files with 60 additions and 5 deletions

View File

@ -28,6 +28,64 @@ Pentesting APIs involves a structured approach to uncovering vulnerabilities. Th
- **Advanced Parameter Techniques**: Test with unexpected data types in JSON payloads or play with XML data for XXE injections. Also, try parameter pollution and wildcard characters for broader testing.
- **Version Testing**: Older API versions might be more susceptible to attacks. Always check for and test against multiple API versions.
### Authorization & Business Logic (AuthN != AuthZ) — tRPC/Zod protectedProcedure pitfalls
Modern TypeScript stacks commonly use tRPC with Zod for input validation. In tRPC, `protectedProcedure` typically ensures the request has a valid session (authentication) but does not imply the caller has the right role/permissions (authorization). This mismatch leads to Broken Function Level Authorization/BOLA if sensitive procedures are only gated by `protectedProcedure`.
- Threat model: Any low-privileged authenticated user can call admin-grade procedures if role checks are missing (e.g., background migrations, feature flags, tenant-wide maintenance, job control).
- Black-box signal: `POST /api/trpc/<router>.<procedure>` endpoints that succeed for basic accounts when they should be admin-only. Self-serve signups drastically increase exploitability.
- Typical tRPC route shape (v10+): JSON body wrapped under `{"input": {...}}`.
Example vulnerable pattern (no role/permission gate):
```ts
// The endpoint for retrying a migration job
// This checks for a valid session (authentication)
retry: protectedProcedure
// but not for an admin role (authorization).
.input(z.object({ name: z.string() }))
.mutation(async ({ input, ctx }) => {
// Logic to restart a sensitive migration
}),
```
Practical exploitation (black-box)
1) Register a normal account and obtain an authenticated session (cookies/headers).
2) Enumerate background jobs or other sensitive resources via “list”/“all”/“status” procedures.
```bash
curl -s -X POST 'https://<tenant>/api/trpc/backgroundMigrations.all' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-b '<AUTH_COOKIES>' \
--data '{"input":{}}'
```
3) Invoke privileged actions such as restarting a job:
```bash
curl -s -X POST 'https://<tenant>/api/trpc/backgroundMigrations.retry' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-b '<AUTH_COOKIES>' \
--data '{"input":{"name":"<migration_name>"}}'
```
Impact to assess
- Data corruption via non-idempotent restarts: Forcing concurrent runs of migrations/workers can create race conditions and inconsistent partial states (silent data loss, broken analytics).
- DoS via worker/DB starvation: Repeatedly triggering heavy jobs can exhaust worker pools and database connections, causing tenant-wide outages.
Detection heuristics
- Look for sensitive semantics in procedure names: `*migrations*`, `*admin*`, `*status*`, `*retry*`, `*featureFlags*`, `*tenants*`, `*jobs*`.
- Compare responses across roles: If a basic user can successfully call state-changing admin endpoints, you likely have BFLA/BOLA.
- Check for missing server-side RBAC/ABAC in middleware. Input validation with Zod is orthogonal to authorization.
Notes for remediation (for dev teams you report to)
- Introduce an explicit `adminProcedure` or equivalent middleware that enforces role/permission checks on all sensitive routers (`list`/`all`, `status`, `retry`, etc.).
- Add rate limiting and idempotency/locking around maintenance endpoints to limit blast radius.
### **Tools and Resources for API Pentesting**
- [**kiterunner**](https://github.com/assetnote/kiterunner): Excellent for discovering API endpoints. Use it to scan and brute force paths and parameters against target APIs.
@ -53,8 +111,6 @@ kr brute https://domain.com/api/ -w /tmp/lang-english.txt -x 20 -d=0
## References
- [https://github.com/Cyber-Guy1/API-SecurityEmpire](https://github.com/Cyber-Guy1/API-SecurityEmpire)
- [How An Authorization Flaw Reveals A Common Security Blind Spot: CVE-2025-59305 Case Study](https://www.depthfirst.com/post/how-an-authorization-flaw-reveals-a-common-security-blind-spot-cve-2025-59305-case-study)
{{#include ../../banners/hacktricks-training.md}}

View File

@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ Yes, you can, but **don't forget to mention the specific link(s)** where the con
> [!TIP]
>
> - **How can I cite a page of HackTricks?**
> - **How can I a page of HackTricks?**
As long as the link **of** the page(s) where you took the information from appears it's enough.\
If you need a bibtex you can use something like:
@ -144,4 +144,3 @@ This license does not grant any trademark or branding rights in relation to the
{{#include ../banners/hacktricks-training.md}}