hunt-mfa-bypass
Skill2 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
1. Login with valid credentials → receive a 'pre-MFA' session state
3 other projects use a version of this, 3 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- murrtada/bug-bounty-agent-skillsedited, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunteredited, first seen Jul 1, 2026
- hhjkjkjk/Claude-skillsedited, first seen May 29, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 3
- elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter★ 6.1k90% same
- murrtada/bug-bounty-agent-skills★ 789% same
- hhjkjkjk/Claude-skills★ 081% same
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository255 other files it gives its agents.
- ad-acl-abuseSkill
- ad-adcs-access-and-relaySkill
- ad-adcs-persistenceSkill
- ad-adcs-template-abuseSkill
- ad-ad-discoverySkill
- ad-ad-persistenceSkill
- ad-auth-coercion-relaySkill
- ad-credential-dumpingSkill
- ad-gpo-abuseSkill
- ad-kerberos-delegationSkill
- ad-kerberos-roastingSkill
- ad-kerberos-ticket-forgingSkill
- ad-pass-the-hashSkill
- ad-sccm-exploitationSkill
- ad-trust-attacksSkill
- hunt-ntlm-infoSkill
- offensive-active-directorySkill
- hunt-llm-aiSkill
- hunt-rag-vectorSkill
- offensive-ai-securitySkill
- cloud-iam-deepSkill
- hunt-cloud-misconfigSkill
- hunt-k8sSkill
- m365-entra-attackSkill
- network-container-escapesSkill
- offensive-cloudSkill
- offensive-container-escapeSkill
- offensive-k8s-attacksSkill
- okta-attackSkill
- vmware-vcenter-attackSkill
- credential-password-sprayingSkill
- hunt-brute-forceSkill
- hunt-forgot-passwordSkill
- post-exploit-credential-recoverySkill
- meme-coin-auditSkill
- offensive-crypto-attacksSkill
- web3-auditSkill
- ctfSkill
- advisory-miningSkill
- auth-bypassSkill
- code-injection-codegenSkill
- command-injectionSkill
- cross-pollinationSkill
- cve-hunting-methodologySkill
- decompression-bombSkill
- entity-expansionSkill
- fp-checkSkill
- method-clobberingSkill
- path-traversalSkill
- prototype-pollutionSkill
- recursion-dosSkill
- redosSkill
- sandbox-escapeSkill
- target-reconSkill
- web2-vuln-classesSkill
- evasion-av-edr-evasionSkill
- offensive-anti-forensicsSkill
- offensive-edr-evasionSkill
- offensive-keylogger-archSkill
- offensive-mitigationsSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
If the response returns user data → MFA is enforced only in the UI, not server-side = Critical
- Distinctive: line 21
If accepted → OTP is not invalidated after use
- Distinctive: line 27
If a guessed full code is rejected, test whether the server validates the OTP prefix-by-prefix instead of all-or-nothing.
- Distinctive: line 29
If a *correct* prefix gives a DIFFERENT response than a wrong one (a success/flag, a distinct message, or a different length/timing), the …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
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):
- Login with valid credentials → receive a "pre-MFA" session state
- Without completing MFA, directly access a protected resource (
/dashboard,/api/me,/account/profile) - 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):
- Complete a valid MFA flow to get a working OTP
- Log out, log in again with the same credentials
- Submit the same OTP again
- 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:
- Submit a 1–3 digit value (e.g.
otp=1, thenotp=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. - 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.
- 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,…,9before 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
# 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 banPattern 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 checkPattern 4: Skip MFA Step (Workflow Bypass)
# 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/dashboardPattern 5: Race on MFA Verification
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 locationMFA 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 = HighRelated 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.hunt-race-condition— Pattern 5 (OTP race) lives in race-condition territory; load both skills together. Chain primitive: same 6-digit OTP submitted via 20 parallel HTTP/2 streams (single-packet Turbo Intruder attack) before the server marks it used → 1 success + 19 "already-used" → race window confirmed → attacker doesn't need to brute, just guesses once and parallelizes → ATO.hunt-auth-bypass— MFA-step-skip is auth-flow bypass at the workflow layer. Chain primitive: pre-MFA cookie issued after password step + direct navigation to/dashboardskipping/mfaroute + server only middleware-gates/mfanot/dashboard= full post-auth access from password-only state → MFA never enforced because the route gate was misplaced.hunt-misc— Recovery-code dump via/api/meis a misc-class info disclosure that becomes Critical when chained. Chain primitive:/api/mereturns full user object includingbackup_codesarray (plaintext, never rotated) → attacker with any read-IDOR or XSS exfils backup codes → uses one backup code → MFA satisfied → ATO without OTP knowledge.security-arsenal— Pull the OTP-brute-force payload section (000000-999999 wordlist generator, ffuf rate-limit-evasion patterns with-t 5 -p 0.5-2, distributed-IP rotation via proxychains) and the JWT-token-replay table when "MFA satisfied" claim lives in a JWT claim that can be forged.triage-validation— Run the Pre-Severity Gate before claiming Critical on an MFA bypass that only works when the attacker already has the password. Standalone MFA bypass is High; chained-with-password-oracle is Critical; chained-with-cookie-theft-only is Critical. The chain question separates the two.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

