Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Syntax Highliting #13

Open
Hipapheralkus opened this issue May 2, 2017 · 2 comments
Open

Syntax Highliting #13

Hipapheralkus opened this issue May 2, 2017 · 2 comments

Comments

@Hipapheralkus
Copy link

I noticed that this extender doesn't highlight payloads; and the information in Advisory is always identical.
When I have an issue discovered, and press "Move to the next match" in both Request and Response; it would be very nice to see the payload as well as identified response highlighted.
Also, the Advisory tab for found issue could be more specific -> e.g. "Referer: ${9*2}" resulted in "blablabla18blabla" in response; so that false positives could be found faster.

@0xdevalias
Copy link

Was just coming over here to open an issue about the same thing!

@obi-jon
Copy link

obi-jon commented Oct 20, 2017

Yes, this ^^.
But first, Great scanner, saves me a lot of time.

Currently you have to guess at what the finding is claiming. As an example I had several apparent EL (Expression Language) Injection findings that took me a little while to determine what exactly the tests were triggering on. The advisory tab was no help. Finally I noticed that the Issues pane shows a field/parameter next to the URL. After looking at the parameter I see a mathematical expression. After solving the expression I did a search for that value in the response. Alas, false positives. All that to say that including, in the advisory tab, the payload used on which parameter or header in the finding would go a long way toward improving the user friendliness of this scanner.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants