/hunt-idor

name: hunt-idor
description: Hunting skill for idor vulnerabilities. Built from 26 public bug bounty reports. Use when hunting idor on any target.
sources: github, hackerone_public
report_count: 39

Crown Jewel Targets

**Why IDOR pays big:**

• Direct access to other users' data without authentication bypass — clear, demonstrable impact
• Chains easily with privilege escalation, financial fraud, and account takeover
• Affects virtually every application with user-owned resources

**Highest-value asset types (by payout potential):**

| Asset Type | Why It Pays | |---|---| | Financial documents / billing APIs | PII + financial data exposure (Shopify, Uber, PayPal) | | Private repositories / source code | IP theft, critical data loss (GitHub) | | User messages / DMs | Privacy violation at scale (Reddit) | | Account management endpoints | User addition, deletion, privilege escalation (PayPal, Mozilla) | | Business/org administration | Cross-tenant escalation, employee PII (Uber) | | Content moderation/admin actions | Operational sabotage (Reddit mod logs) |

**Programs that pay most for IDOR:**

• Platforms with multi-tenancy (SaaS, B2B tools)
• Fintech and payment processors
• Social platforms with private content
• Developer tools with org/repo isolation

---

Attack Surface Signals

**URL patterns that scream IDOR:**

/api/v1/users/{id}/
/api/v*/orders/{order_id}
/invoices/download?id=
/reports/{uuid}/
/messages/{thread_id}
/admin/orgs/{org_id}/members
/migration/{migration_id}/files
/graphql (query params with IDs)
/api/business/{business_id}/
/vouchers/{voucher_id}/policy

**Response header signals:**

• `Content-Type: application/json` on endpoints accepting raw IDs
• No `X-Frame-Options` or CORS misconfigs paired with ID params
• `Authorization: Bearer` tokens that are user-scoped but hit org-level resources

**JavaScript source patterns:**

// Look for hardcoded or interpolated IDs in JS
fetch(`/api/v1/users/${userId}/profile`)
axios.get('/invoices/' + invoiceId)
graphql query { billingDocument(id: $docId) }
// Redux/state stores exposing foreign IDs
state.currentUser.organizationId

**Tech stack signals:**

• GraphQL endpoints (query-based IDORs are often missed)
• REST APIs with sequential integer IDs (most vulnerable)
• UUIDs that are predictable or leaked in other responses
• Multi-tenant SaaS apps with `org_id`, `account_id`, `business_id` params
• Mobile apps (Burp the APK — mobile APIs often skip authorization checks)

---

Step-by-Step Hunting Methodology

1. **Map all object references in the application**

• Browse every feature authenticated as User A
• Capture all requests in Burp Suite
• Filter for requests containing: `id=`, `_id=`, `uuid=`, `/v1/{noun}/{id}`, query params with numeric/UUID values

2. **Enumerate ID types**

• Sequential integers → enumerate ±1, ±100
• UUIDs → check if they appear in other responses or JS files
• Hashed IDs → check if leaked in public endpoints, metadata, or GraphQL introspection

3. **Create two separate accounts (same privilege level)**

• User A: resource owner
• User B: attacker account
• Log all IDs belonging to User A while authenticated as User A

4. **Replay User A's resource IDs as User B**

• Replace session cookie/token with User B's credentials
• Send identical requests referencing User A's object IDs
• Test ALL HTTP verbs: GET, POST, PUT, PATCH, DELETE on each endpoint

5. **Test cross-tenant/cross-org scenarios**

• Create accounts in separate organizations/businesses
• Test if Org B's session can reference Org A's IDs
• Pay special attention to admin/management endpoints

6. **Test GraphQL specifically**

• Run introspection: `{ __schema { queryType { fields { name } } } }`
• For every query/mutation taking an `id` argument, substitute another user's ID
• Test both queries (read) and mutations (write/delete)

7. **Test write/destructive operations, not just reads**

• Can User B DELETE User A's resources?
• Can User B MODIFY User A's content?
• Can User B ADD themselves to User A's account?

8. **Chain IDORs together**

• Use one IDOR's leaked data (org IDs, user IDs) to fuel the next
• IDOR → leaked ID → second IDOR → privilege escalation

9. **Test state-changing edge cases**

• Expired tokens/invites that can still be accepted
• Race conditions on resource IDs
• Indirect references: `?sort=id` or `?filter[user_id]=`

10. **Document the exact differential**

• Confirm User B has NO legitimate access to User A's resource
• Screenshot/log the 200 OK vs expected 403/404

---

Payload & Detection Patterns

**Basic IDOR test with curl (swap cookie/token):**

# Get User A's resource ID while authenticated as A
curl -s -H "Cookie: session=USER_A_SESSION" \
  https://target.com/api/v1/invoices/12345

# Replay with User B's session
curl -s -H "Cookie: session=USER_B_SESSION" \
  https://target.com/api/v1/invoices/12345

# Success = 200 OK with User A's data

**GraphQL IDOR test:**

curl -s -X POST https://target.com/graphql \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer USER_B_TOKEN" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"query":"{ billingDocument(id: \"USER_A_DOC_ID\") { id amount pdfUrl } }"}'

**Enumerate sequential IDs with ffuf:**

ffuf -u "https://target.com/api/v1/orders/FUZZ" \
  -w ids.txt \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer USER_B_TOKEN" \
  -mc 200 \
  -o idor_results.json

**Generate sequential ID wordlist:**

# Generate IDs around a known value
known_id = 48291
with open("ids.txt", "w") as f:
    for i in range(known_id - 500, known_id + 500):
        f.write(str(i) + "\n")

**Burp Intruder payload for IDOR scanning:**

GET /api/messages/§12345§ HTTP/1.1
Host: target.com
Authorization: Bearer USER_B_TOKEN

# Mark §12345§ as injection point
# Use numeric sequential payload: 12000-13000
# Filter responses by length difference or status 200

**JavaScript scraping