In this article we’ll summarise how various active and passive scanning tools can automate and streamline your Burp Suite workflow – saving you time in the process.

📁 Goals for Burp automation
📂 Burp extensions and built-in tools used
├─ Extensions
├─ Built-in tools
📁 Automated workflow
📂 Active scans
├─ BCheck
├─ Burp Bounty
📂 Passive scans
├─ Passive scanner
├─ Passive live crawler
├─ Error Message Check and Response Grepper
├─ BCheck
📁 Logger++
📁 Manual testing still matters

 automation is to save time and automate less complex tasks that are needed to improve manual testing. The automation should cover the very core of our target application and collect as much information as possible. The primary method is using passive scanners to avoid making too much noise as an attacker.

All the information we collect helps us to better understand the application and thereby improve our active automation in the long term.

The automated workflow is divided into two fields: the blue ones represent passive scans while the red ones represent active scans.

The passive scanners will benefit from analysing the outcomes of the active scanners. For example, an active scanner that has triggered a behavior in the target application that leaks an error message in the application's response. The passive scanner will analyse and report the discovered error message to Burp's dashboard, allowing the scanners to work efficiently together and keep our results organised in Burp's dashboard.

As shown in the workflow image above, we will handle the distribution of responses in the following way: responses captured by the proxy will be given to both the passive and active scanner, while responses intercepted by the repeater, extensions and scanners will only be given to the passive scanner.

This structure is built to keep an efficient flow and synchronise all ongoing scans. The passive scanner can dig deep into the responses produced by the active scanners. and the active scanners will keep a low request volume to our target. Since the active scanners have a low request volume to our target, the passive scanner using our hardware's performance will be able to handle the responses without stacking up a massive queue of tasks.

We will have all our ongoing live tasks on 

The active scans will contain our automated attack process. The primary goal of this automation is not to fully exploit the application with these attacks. Instead, it is to discover and trigger as much back-end functionality as possible, by performing 

BCheck is a fairly new feature in Burp, at the time of writing this article. The main reason to use it for our purposes is that it allows us to write BCheck scripts directly in Burp itself. This is useful because it allows us to quickly 

 to perform attack techniques adapted to our collected scan results.

The second reason is that, rather than running complex scans, we can conduct scans like fuzzing a list of files and directories on newly discovered hosts or preform friendly payload spraying to detect possible behaviors within our targets.

It's good practice to keep track of the requests made for each BCheck that performs an active scan. We can do this by adding a custom header - eg: 

X-BCheck-Track: bcheck={BCHECK_NAME}, tag={TAG}

. With this header, we can more easily track and organise all BCheck requests that appear in Logger++.

The Burp Bounty extension is an excellent choice when it comes to slightly more complex scans, with the main advantage of offering great customisation. We can both provide and tamper with the payload used during the scanning process. Burp Bounty also gives us the ability to select detection rules, which allows us to leverage our experience of how different payloads may affect the application we are pentesting.

The passive scans play an important role as a second layer of detection. They can take advantage of the performance of our own hardware to search for errors or patterns and/or compare behaviors already performed by the active scans. This way, we can do more in-depth analysis of the responses from the target, which can lead to discoveries that the active scanner missed.

Burp's built-in passive scanner is great because it covers a wide range of detection techniques. These techniques include detecting services, version banners, misconfiguration and a whole lot more.

We will use Burp's built-in passive scanner to collect as much information as possible from our target.

However, in some cases the JavaScript analyzer used in the passive scanner can draw a lot of hardware performance. If you encounter such issues, read Burp's official documentation for configuration advice on mitigating this problem.

The passive crawler helps us build up a base of the sitemap for our target. We can analyse the discovered routes that are passively added, and get an idea of how the application is structured and what functionalities might be available for us to test.

Error and pattern discovery is one of the most important parts of automation. By looking for errors and patterns within your target, you can extract a lot of useful information. This information can be used both to understand your target and to adapt your active scanners in the future, as it can catch trace errors and other differences in responses that the active scanner itself may have missed.

In the passive scanning process, BChecks will be used to discover the technologies and service that the target application is running. By finding out the technology and/or service of the application, we can filter out data and payloads. By extracting information that allows us to see that our target application mainly uses PHP as its programming language, for example, we can ignore/reduce the amount of payloads related to Java, Ruby, Python and other languages. This allows our automation to maintain its flow and avoid building up a large queue of unnecessary processes.

), adding a tracking header to each BCheck that defines a primary tag and the name of the BCheck used is an effective way to keep track of your requests (

The Logger++ extension is a powerful extension that allows us to log every request and response from all sources in Burp. It offers advanced filtering and highlighting rules that we will use to monitor and analyse all our traffic. We will also use Logger++ to troubleshoot our automation process if something goes wrong.

As the image above shows, we can highlight requests from various tools and requests containing the custom header that we use to track processes such as BCheck scans.

Automation is generally useful, but you should always try to keep the automated workflow aligned with your manual testing. 

Automation will always miss things, so don't rely on it entirely. Rather, combine with manual testing and examine the results of both. This way you can focus more on the creativity of hacking and spend less time looking for new features in the application.

Smart Automation With Burp Suite

Rapid automation will define the evolution of Bug Bounty hunting in the coming years.

That’s according to GoDiego, a full-time hunter from Spain. At the time of writing, the 22-year-old sits 19th on YesWeHack’s 

 (real name: Diego Bernal Adelantado) is the inaugural interviewee in a series of Bug Bounty hunter Q&As we’re publishing on our blog, in text and video form (some videos are already 

). The Q&As, which ask YesWeHack hunters about their backstory, finest discoveries so far and advice for newbies, should at once be inspirational and educational for their peers.

GODIEGO ON GETTING INTO HACKING AND BUG BOUNTY…

I’ve been hacking for like four years now, I think, more or less. It’s been a wild ride!

My story is a bit random because I first started when I was like 15. I was bored in my room, and I said: “Oh, I don’t know anything about computers – let’s teach myself how to code.”

Then a couple of years later I found out about 

. I didn’t know what it was at the time, so I didn’t pay much attention, so I just kept learning stuff.

And then I just got drawn into it, and started doing Bug Bounty – and here I am!

THE THREE WORDS THAT BEST DESCRIBE HIS DEFINING QUALITIES AS A HACKER…

I would say: persistent, creative and curious.

ON HIS MOST CREATIVE VULNERABILITY DISCOVERY SO FAR…

I would say that my most creative and special bug was my first one, because I was testing one of the major news companies. They have a ‘limited’ program. So I was testing it. At this point I was a noob: I didn’t know what I was doing.

There was this feature for careers applications. I tried a couple of payloads – nothing worked. Then, one day, I noticed that they had this “submit a Word document” feature so I tried that, and nothing happened. I put some 

 payloads inside, then saved Word again – it didn’t work.

But they had this button: “Extract data and fill in application from Word”. So I took that then got the pingback.

At first I couldn’t believe it. And then it turned out, yeah – it was accepted!

ON WHAT IMPRESSES HIM MOST ABOUT YESWEHACK…

From my point of view, the thing that makes YesWeHack different is that the triagers are very fast. I sometimes put in a bug and then a couple of minutes later it’s on triage. That’s quite nice!

Also, there are some very good programs, and I’ve had very good interactions with them.

HIS PREDICTIONS FOR THE EVOLUTION OF BUG BOUNTY…

The Bug Bounty world is moving into an automated era, where most people are just relying on 

. So in the future, from my point of view, everything will be based on post-authentication bugs, rather than just finding, I don’t know, an exposed Git repo or something like that.

The level of automation that is going on right now is crazy.

HIS ADVICE FOR ETHICAL HACKING BEGINNERS…

I would say: experiment. Most of the times I found a bug while trying random theories, or saying: “well, what would happen if I tried this or tried that?”

Just don’t rely on other people’s tools; be creative and do your own thing. Because in the end that’s what’s gonna make you stand out and be different!

Learn more about hunting through YesWeHack

, or learn about the latest hacking tools and techniques 

‘The level of automation right now is crazy’: GoDiego on why post-auth vulnerabilities are the future of Bug Bounty

Cybersecurity is a more pressing priority than ever for US-listed companies and foreign private issuers in the wake of new rules and a landmark enforcement action from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The new SEC cyber rules, in force since 15 December, introduced mandatory reporting of “material” cybersecurity incidents and new annual disclosure obligations around cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance.

A month earlier the SEC stunned the cybersecurity industry when it 

charged SolarWinds and its Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)

 with fraud and internal control failures related to a catastrophic cyber-attack in 2020 – an unprecedented move for the agency.

Even cybercriminals have noticed the SEC’s increasingly muscular approach to cybersecurity. In November, the BlackCat ransomware gang 

 to the agency for failing to disclose BlackCat’s breach of the digital lending platform.

Added to increasingly numerous and sophisticated cyber-attacks, the SEC’s latest manoeuvres are certainly focusing minds in the boardroom (and not necessarily just for public companies).

With digital transformation ongoing and code vulnerabilities a 

unified, multi-layered offensive security strategy

 is invaluable in reassuring both regulators and stakeholders about your security posture. To this end, for instance, 

YesWeHack’s all-in-one vulnerability management platform

 consolidates auto-scanning, Bug Bounty, pentest management, a vulnerability disclosure mechanism and attack surface management.

Public companies must now disclose in their annual filings “any cybersecurity incident they determine to be material” within four days of deeming it material, 

 when the new SEC cybersecurity rules were adopted in July 2023. Their disclosure must “describe the material aspects of the incident’s nature, scope, and timing, as well as its material impact or reasonably likely material impact on the registrant.”

The SEC cybersecurity rules 2023 also require a description of “their processes, if any, for assessing, identifying, and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats, as well as the material effects or reasonably likely material effects of risks from cybersecurity threats and previous cybersecurity incidents.”

Third and final, filings must “describe the board of directors’ oversight of risks from cybersecurity threats and management’s role and expertise in assessing and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats.”

These cybersecurity risk management and incident disclosure obligations require comparable disclosures by foreign private issuers.

The SEC cybersecurity rules’ effective date was 15 December 2023. ‘Smaller reporting companies’ have an additional 180 days before they must start disclosing ‘material’ incidents.

Why was the SolarWinds CISO charged by the SEC?

, the observability and IT management platform, and its CISO, Timothy Brown, “for fraud and internal control failures relating to allegedly known cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities”.

It was the first time the SEC had ever brought cybersecurity-related charges against a CISO.

The bombshell news relates to the nearly two-year-long ‘Sunburst’ attack, which compromised 18,000 SolarWinds customers via a backdoor implanted in a software update for IT performance monitoring system Orion. Microsoft, NASA and the US justice and state departments were among the victims.

The charges allege that “SolarWinds and Brown defrauded investors by overstating SolarWinds’ cybersecurity practices and understating or failing to disclose known risks”. Brown is also alleged to have “failed to resolve” certain “risks and vulnerabilities” or “at times, sufficiently raise them further within the company”.

The SEC cyber disclosure rules show the agency is getting serious about cybersecurity. Why?

The SEC, which enforces securities laws, appears to increasingly see cybersecurity as central to its mission of protecting investors and facilitating capital formation.

“Whether a company loses a factory in a fire – or millions of files in a cybersecurity incident – it may be material to investors,” explained SEC chair Gary Gensler upon the rules’ adoption. He said companies and investors would benefit if their cybersecurity disclosures “were made in a more consistent, comparable, and decision-useful way”.

On the eve of the new rules coming into effect, Erik Gerding, director of the SEC’s corporation finance division, 

 the trajectory of multiple trends highlighted “investors’ need for improved disclosure” about cybersecurity issues. Namely, he cited the AI threat and increases in the digitisation of economic activity, remote work, the profitability of cyber-attacks, the use of digital payments, and reliance on third-party cloud and IT service providers.

Gerding also noted the rising costs – up to $4.45 million per data breach in 2023, 

 – associated with successful cyber-attacks.

Far from simply encouraging “boilerplate disclosures”, Gerding said the new cybersecurity disclosure requirements should elicit “tailored disclosures” that help investors evaluate even “emergent or evolving” risks.

Do the SEC cybersecurity rules for public companies affect other organisations?

The new SEC rules on cybersecurity apply directly only to US-listed companies and 

Organisations not subject to SEC oversight might nevertheless see its new rules as offering a useful framework for being transparent with their own stakeholders.

Moreover, with software supply chain attacks increasing, privately-held organisations can still be held liable as third-party suppliers implicated in cybersecurity incidents disclosed by public companies.

The SEC has not shied away from launching enforcement actions against private entities, most famously over the Theranos blood-testing scandal that 

landed founder Elizabeth Holmes in prison

. More recently, the SEC has targeted private clean energy company 

The new SEC cybersecurity rules and SolarWinds charges are also part of a 

 – propelled by the White House’s cybersecurity-focused 

 of 2021 – making stringent cybersecurity controls a greater legal and compliance imperative.

The trend is global. Across the Atlantic, for instance, the 

 – Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) are imposing new compliance requirements on organisations operating within the EU.

What are the implications of the SEC cybersecurity disclosure rules for my cyber-risk management strategy?

In mandating greater transparency and consistency in registrants’ cybersecurity disclosures, the SEC will hope to encourage a more rigorous approach to cyber-risk management.

Specifically how those risks are mitigated amid fast-evolving threats and technology is left to organisations to judge.

“In order to address a potential misconception, the Commission is not seeking to prescribe particular cybersecurity defenses, practices, technologies, risk management, governance, or strategy,” said Erik Gerding. “Public companies have the flexibility to decide how to address cybersecurity risks and threats based on their own particular facts and circumstances.”

In unifying and streamlining offensive security testing and its outcomes, the YesWeHack platform suits organisations of various sizes, sectors and levels of security maturity. It also offers increasingly powerful security benefits in the context of the current threat and infosec industry landscape.

How can I proactively improve my cyber-risk management strategy with YesWeHack in light of the SEC cybersecurity rules?

Our platform can help public companies enhance their SEC disclosures around “assessing, identifying, and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats”.

How? First, our Vulnerability Disclosure Policy (

) product provides a simple, standardised mechanism for receiving external vulnerability reports.

 Program, which is inherently more scalable, draws on a much broader skills base and has fewer methodological constraints than traditional security testing. As such, this form of crowdsourced security testing reliably surfaces serious vulnerabilities even on heavily-pentested scopes.

A Bug Bounty Program extends and maximises your security testing coverage through an unlimited pool of ethical hackers and a continuous, flexible audit of your growing attack surface.

But to comprehensively secure your attack surface, you must first understand its size and composition. Hence Gartner cited continuous Attack Surface Management (ASM) as a 

 that gives a real-time, comprehensive picture of your attack surface (including the third-party assets that the SEC’s Erik Gerding expressed concern about).

The ASM, which leverages a Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) model, also detects your online assets’ exposure to known vulnerabilities and provides automated, risk-based prioritisation of those security flaws.

How can I reassure investors or other stakeholders over our cybersecurity posture given budgetary and recruitment challenges?

 flat or shrinking cybersecurity budgets in 2023, while the global shortfall in infosec skills reached a 

Fortunately, the YesWeHack platform can both increase the cost-effectiveness of your OffSec strategy and unlock access to various skills – from problem solving to cloud security – apparently 

lacking in the current infosec jobs market

YesWeHack offers a pay-by-results testing model (paying only for valid, actionable bugs, according to severity), and substantially streamlines vulnerability management and remediation.

 solution consolidates pentest findings from all providers into one, user-friendly reporting interface. Similarly, the overall YesWeHack platform combines asset discovery with vulnerabilities from various sources – ASM auto-scanning, pentests, Bug Bounty, VDP – into a single interface.

The result is a unified, comprehensive and risk-based approach to security testing.

What do the SEC’s new cybersecurity rules and enforcement stance mean for the role of CISOs and senior executives?

In addressing boardroom-level oversight of cybersecurity risk management, the new SEC cyber rules are a firm reminder to CISOs and other senior executives that they bear ultimate responsibility for their organisation’s cybersecurity posture. The SolarWinds action serves notice that they can be held to account if they fall short.

“It’s clear that delegating oversight entirely to the security team, striving merely for ‘box-ticking’ compliance, or simply throwing money at the cybersecurity problem will no longer suffice,” says Rodolphe Harand, managing director of YesWeHack. “More than ever, CISOs must frequently ‘reality check’ their online risks.

“To this end, they must source the best, most cost-effective processes and technologies for the proactive discovery, evaluation and mitigation of risks – and in a way that is easy to convey to regulators and their stakeholders. We believe the YesWeHack platform can efficiently facilitate these goals.”

The YesWeHack platform provides real-time visibility of your potential attack vectors and a unified, multi-layered model for uncovering, prioritising and remediating vulnerabilities. It also provides functionality that facilitates the production of what the SEC calls “consistent, comparable, and decision-useful” disclosures.

Real-time tracking of vulnerability reports

Real-time view of your ‘asset coverage’ – ie, seeing which assets are currently being tested, by which methods, and the outcomes so far

Integrations with popular bug-tracking tools

Ability to certify compliance and share vulnerability information with authorities via dashboards and one-click generation of proofs of audit and exportable executive summaries

YesWeHack’s GDPR compliance, CREST accreditation plus ISO 27001 and ISO 27017 certifications can give stakeholders further reassurance. The same applies to our zero-trust network, bombproof infrastructure and state-of-the-art encryption, among 

Proactive, multilayered and unified security testing is a strategic investment. CONTACT OUR SALES TEAM to BOOK A DEMO of our Bug Bounty service or ASM, and to find out more about how your organisation can secure your growing attack surface cost-effectively.

US SEC cyber rules, SolarWinds CISO charges: How a unified OffSec strategy can enhance your SEC disclosures

Welcome to a new era for our CTF training platform 

Designed for a broad spectrum of cybersecurity enthusiasts, from Bug Bounty hunters to CTF champions, the latest iteration of Dojo is set to enhance the experience of creating and engaging with security challenges. With extended support for popular server-side programming languages like PHP, Python and Java, 

Dojo is your indispensable partner for mastering cybersecurity skills

We've rolled out a host of new features, designed to enhance your user experience and encourage greater participation:

: A user-friendly environment and easier navigation.

: A streamlined registration process for quicker access.

Expanded support for back-end vulnerabilities

: Greater flexibility in crafting challenges.

: Engage with challenges created by the community.

The Challenges section offers a more intuitive navigation system coupled with several useful new features.

You can now create challenges in a wider array of programming languages, including PHP, Python, Node.js and HTML, and choose the client-side rendering style that best suits your challenge. This flexibility is essential for designing realistic and engaging cybersecurity puzzles.

Mastering vulnerabilities through hands-on training

, accessible from the homepage, provides an in-depth exploration of various vulnerabilities. For instance, learn about 

 vulnerabilities, their underlying mechanics, and how different programming languages can influence their exploitation.

These practical exercises offer a hands-on approach to mastering the finding and exploitation of vulnerabilities. They also feature challenges that mimic common protection mechanisms.

Understanding how things work 'under the hood' is the most crucial aspect of hacking. 

Dojo offers a unique ability to see in real-time the effects of your actions and attempted attacks

, allowing you to understand what you're trying to achieve rather than blindly attacking. 

Combined with quick tips, clear explanations and code snippets, this makes Dojo an excellent launchpad for budding bug hunters.

Creating a challenge is now more intuitive and flexible. Start by setting up custom configurations and secrets with our startup code feature. Steps:

2. Fill in the challenge details, select the runner and click on 

3. Customise your challenge on the new page with various options.


4. Write the code to your challenge in the 


5. Fine-tune your filters and test their impact on inputs.

tab, you can modify the properties of that filter in the 

7. Test inputs in real-time and enhance challenge complexity with your added filters.


8. Congratulations, you have just created your first Dojo challenge!

Let's start with our very first Dojo v2 challenge: 

. In this challenge our goal is to escape the system command 

 which is running in the Python function 

). The input is then inserted into the Python variable 

, which is filtered one more time by using a short blacklist. The blacklist will stop the code and print 

 if our input contains any of the following characters : 

Now that we have a good understanding of how the code works and what filters are in place, we can start solving the challenge.

However, you are welcome to solve the challenge yourself without a walk-through and return to this article when you have solved it.

To test the WAF, we can simply make an input containing any of the characters the WAF is looking for and see the result:

Now we will instead use a valid value that the application expects to receive from the client:

The blacklist prevents us in various ways from escaping the 

 - but that doesn't mean it's completely safe. We can bypass the blacklist and WAF by specifying the values 

 command and then execute our inject system command. We will run the system command 

 to see if we can see the flag file in the folder we're located in.

Success! We were able to execute our own system command using 

 is within the same folder we are currently working in. Now we open the flag and solve the challenge!

Congrats! You have just earned your first flag and successfully solved the challenge 

Monthly DOJO challenges: A chance to shine

. This allows you to elevate your skills, compete with peers and earn rewards! Here's what you can expect when you manage to solve a Dojo challenge and submit a report:

Gain invitations to private Bug Bounty Programs!

Moreover, each challenge is an opportunity to showcase your skills and learn new ones!

The new Dojo platform offers a much better experience when creating challenges thanks to the new user interface and ability to choose from a wider range of programming languages, as well as the client-side rendering mode.

It therefore provides the opportunity to create more interesting challenges and a superior user experience for both creator and participants. The limitations are almost as good as gone and nothing will now stop you from creating even better challenges. We look forward to seeing the challenges that will now be created by the community.

If you are interested in creating your own monthly challenge for our hunters to tackle, 

Unveiling Dojo v2: Our new CTF and realistic challenge-building framework

Thirty-one valid vulnerabilities across five heavily pentested applications was a strong first-year return for our latest Bug Bounty success story.

Especially so, given that – in line with best practice – the client in question started small before expanding gradually.

Speaking at our recent ‘Client Success Stories’ event in Singapore, the cybersecurity chief at the global retailer of luxury goods recounted how its private Bug Bounty Program (BBP) had materially “enhanced security and increased compliance” and potentially prevented costly breaches.

“The ROI is easy to justify,” read his presentation slides at the Asia-Pacific (APAC) event in October.

The speaker, whose organisation chose to remain anonymous, recalled how in the year before launching the BBP they “received quite a lot” of bug reports via multiple channels. Some ethical hackers asked for financial rewards, but there was no mechanism or policy for paying for vulnerabilities.

The lack of a formal disclosure mechanism was clearly undermining the reporting, prioritisation and remediation of vulnerabilities.

The organisation already did extensive pentesting – “but I wanted to discover what I did not know”, said the head of cybersecurity.

 was duly put to senior management. As well as discussing the organisation’s risk profile and current security testing program, a killer question was posed: if we don’t pay $2,000 for a critical vulnerability now, what will be the cost of malicious exploitation?

The daily attacks mounted by malicious hackers against the organisation put any security concerns about the activities of ethical hackers in perspective. “It’s a matter of 

” attacks will sometimes succeed, he reflected.

With a pilot duly sanctioned, the security team consulted the IT and finance teams, and CIO and CTO, about choosing a crowdsourced security testing platform.

The YesWeHack Blog

Smart Automation With Burp Suite

‘The level of automation right now is crazy’: GoDiego on why post-auth vulnerabilities are the future of Bug Bounty

US SEC cyber rules, SolarWinds CISO charges: How a unified OffSec strategy can enhance your SEC disclosures

Smart Automation With Burp Suite

Unveiling Dojo v2: Our new CTF and realistic challenge-building framework

'ROI is easy to justify’: Bug Bounty success story from a luxury goods retailer

YesWeHack announces CREST accreditation for pentesting services

Unveiling Dojo v2: Our new CTF and realistic challenge-building framework

Festive Dojo challenge #29: SantaLock winners revealed!

9 rules for a successful first-time Bug Bounty Program

YesWeHack secures ISO/IEC 27017 certification to boost trust in our cloud-based services

Festive Dojo challenge #29: SantaLock winners revealed!

Don't wait for threats to strike

Produits

Chercheurs

Ressources

A propos

Suivez-nous