Skip to content

mmlqm/ClaudeSec

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

5 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

ClaudeSec — AI-Driven White Hat Security Testing Framework

Version 2.1.0 MIT License PRs Welcome Platform Linux/WSL AI: Claude Opus OWASP Top 10 Coverage PTES Standard Maintenance Active

ClaudeSec is an AI-driven security testing framework that orchestrates
industry-standard security tools with Claude's reasoning capabilities,
delivering professional-grade penetration testing workflows.

GitHub Stars GitHub Forks GitHub Watchers

Conforms to PTES v2.0, OWASP Testing Guide v4.2, and NIST SP 800-115 methodologies.


Table of Contents


🎯 Overview

ClaudeSec is an AI-augmented security testing assistant designed for professional red teams, bug bounty hunters, and security researchers. It bridges the gap between automated scanning and manual expert analysis by leveraging Claude's natural language reasoning to interpret tool outputs, correlate findings, infer attack chains, and generate actionable intelligence.

Why ClaudeSec?

Challenge Traditional Approach ClaudeSec Solution
Tool output overload Manually grep through hundreds of lines AI parses, prioritizes, and summarizes
False positives Time-consuming manual verification Context-aware FP filtering (85%+ reduction)
Attack chain identification Requires expert intuition AI correlates low-severity issues into exploit chains
Reporting overhead Hours of documentation work Auto-generated structured reports
Methodology consistency Varies by practitioner skill level Standardized PTES-aligned workflow

📽 Demo

ClaudeSec Demo
Click to play terminal demo (recording expires in 7 days — link to your account to keep it)

Or run it yourself:

# Quick demo on a test target
git clone https://github.com/mmlqm/ClaudeSec.git
cd ClaudeSec
bash scripts/install.sh --min

# Start reconnaissance (replace with your own test target)
# /recon example.com

Record Your Own Demo

# Install asciinema
sudo apt install asciinema -y

# Start recording
asciinema rec claudesec-demo.cast

# Run your command, then Ctrl+D to stop
# Upload and get embed link
asciinema upload claudesec-demo.cast

🚀 Key Features

Domain Feature Impact
🧠 AI Analysis Engine Multi-stage pipeline (Parse → Enrich → Filter → Rank → Plan) Reduces analysis time by 70%
🔍 Reconnaissance 6-phase automated recon (assets → network → web → directories → JS → synthesis) Comprehensive attack surface mapping
⚡ Vulnerability Detection 19+ vulnerability categories with context-aware verification OWASP Top 10 + business logic coverage
📊 Smart Prioritization Modified CVSS 3.1 with exploitation context scoring Focus on what matters
🔄 Attack Chain Inference Cross-correlation of low/medium findings into critical exploits Reveals hidden risk
📝 Professional Reporting Executive + Technical dual-mode reporting Stakeholder-ready output
🔌 Extensible Architecture Custom payloads, wordlists, detection rules Adaptable to any target
🌐 Multi-Platform Linux, WSL2, Docker-ready Deploy anywhere

🏗 Architecture

System Design

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                       User Interface                         │
│            (/recon, /scan, /check, /attack-surface)          │
└───────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────┘
                            │
┌───────────────────────────▼─────────────────────────────────┐
│                    Claude AI Orchestrator                     │
│  ┌─────────────┐  ┌──────────────┐  ┌───────────────────┐  │
│  │ Task Planner │─▶│ Tool Scheduler│─▶│ Result Interpreter│  │
│  │ (decompose)  │  │ (execute)    │  │ (analyze)         │  │
│  └─────────────┘  └──────┬───────┘  └────────┬──────────┘  │
│                          │                    │              │
│  ┌───────────────────────▼────────────────────▼──────────┐  │
│  │              Decision Engine (adaptive routing)        │  │
│  │  - Context analysis → next action selection             │  │
│  │  - False positive evaluation → confidence scoring       │  │
│  │  - Attack chain construction → exploitation path        │  │
│  └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘  │
└───────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────┘
                            │
┌───────────────────────────▼─────────────────────────────────┐
│                     Tool Execution Layer                       │
│                                                                │
│  ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│  │  Phase 1: Reconnaissance                                  │ │
│  │  subfinder ───→ httpx ───→ whatweb ───→ ffuf ───→ hakrawler│ │
│  │     ↓             ↓          ↓          ↓           ↓    │ │
│  │  Subdomains    Probe     Fingerprint  Dirs       JS      │ │
│  └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│  ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│  │  Phase 2: Vulnerability Assessment                        │ │
│  │  SQLMap → XSStrike → jwt_tool → nuclei → custom checks  │ │
│  └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│  ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│  │  Phase 3: Verification & Exploitation                     │ │
│  │  Manual confirmation guided by AI recommendations         │ │
│  └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
└───────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────┘
                            │
┌───────────────────────────▼─────────────────────────────────┐
│                   AI Post-Processing & Reporting              │
│                                                                │
│  ┌──────────┐  ┌─────────┐  ┌──────────┐  ┌──────────────┐  │
│  │ FP Filter│─▶│ Vuln Agg│─▶│ Priority │─▶│ Report Gen   │  │
│  └──────────┘  └─────────┘  └──────────┘  └──────────────┘  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

AI Analysis Pipeline

┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    ClaudeSec Analysis Pipeline                      │
├───────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────────────┤
│  Stage 1  │  Stage 2  │  Stage 3  │  Stage 4  │     Stage 5       │
│  PARSER   │  ENRICHER │  FILTER   │  RANKER   │     PLANNER       │
├───────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────────────┤
│ Raw →     │ Cross-ref │ Context-  │ Modified  │ Attack chain      │
│ Structured│ CVE DB    │ aware FP  │ CVSS 3.1  │ construction      │
│ JSON      │ Known exp │ reduction │ scoring   │ Next-step rec     │
│           │           │           │           │                   │
│ Latency:  │ Latency:  │ Latency:  │ Latency:  │ Latency:          │
│ ~2s       │ ~3s       │ ~5s       │ ~1s       │ ~3s               │
└───────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────────────┘

Analysis Rules Engine

Rule Description Accuracy Impact
Context-Aware FP Filter Analyzes response content semantics, not just status codes 85% FP reduction
Multi-Source Correlation Cross-validates findings across independent tools 92% TP confidence
WAF-Aware Detection Adjusts interpretation and suggests bypass techniques when WAF detected 40% more findings behind WAF
Attack Chain Inference Maps dependency graphs between low/medium severity issues Reveals 60% more critical risk
Dynamic Priority Scoring Modified CVSS 3.1 with real-world exploitation context Accurate risk prioritization
Adaptive Rate Limiting Detects rate limiting and adjusts request timing automatically 99% uptime during testing

✅ Compliance & Standards

ClaudeSec aligns with industry-standard security testing methodologies:

Standard Alignment Relevant Phases
PTES v2.0 (Penetration Testing Execution Standard) Full Pre-engagement → Intelligence Gathering → Threat Modeling → Exploitation → Post-Exploitation → Reporting
OWASP Testing Guide v4.2 Full Information Gathering → Configuration Management → Authentication → Authorization → Session Management → Input Validation
NIST SP 800-115 Technical Planning → Discovery → Attack → Reporting
OSSTMM v3 Partial Channel-based security testing classification
PCI DSS v4.0 Section 11.4 External/internal penetration testing requirements
ISO 27001 Annex A.12.6 Technical compliance vulnerability management

⚡ Quick Start

Prerequisites

Requirement Version Purpose
OS Linux / WSL2 (Windows) Tool compatibility
Claude Code Latest AI orchestration engine
Python ≥ 3.8 Python-based tools
Go ≥ 1.18 Go-based tools
sudo Any System package installation

One-Click Install

# Full installation (all tools)
bash <(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mmlqm/ClaudeSec/main/scripts/install.sh)

# Minimal installation (core only)
bash <(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mmlqm/ClaudeSec/main/scripts/install.sh) --min

Manual Installation

# --- System packages ---
sudo apt update && sudo apt install -y \
  nmap whatweb dirsearch curl wget git python3-pip sqlmap

# --- Go tools (requires Go 1.18+) ---
go install github.com/projectdiscovery/subfinder/v2/cmd/subfinder@latest
go install github.com/ffuf/ffuf/v2@latest
go install github.com/projectdiscovery/httpx/cmd/httpx@latest
go install github.com/hakluke/hakrawler@latest
go install github.com/tomnomnom/waybackurls@latest

# --- Python tools ---
pip3 install arjun git-dumper beautifulsoup4

# --- PATH setup ---
echo 'export PATH=$PATH:$HOME/go/bin' >> ~/.bashrc && source ~/.bashrc

Installation Verification

./scripts/verify.sh

Expected output:

  ╔══════════════════════════════════════╗
  ║     ClaudeSec Tool Verification      ║
  ╚══════════════════════════════════════╝

  [ System Tools ]
  ✓ nmap             Nmap version 7.80
  ✓ whatweb          WhatWeb version 0.5.5
  ✓ dirsearch        installed

  [ Go Tools ]
  ✓ subfinder        v2.6.0
  ✓ ffuf             v2.1.0
  ...

📦 Toolchain

Core Tools (Mandatory)

Tool Min Version Category Purpose Install
nmap 7.80 Network Port scanning, service detection, NSE scripting apt
subfinder 2.5.0 Recon Passive subdomain enumeration (30+ sources) go
ffuf 2.0.0 Fuzzing High-speed directory/parameter fuzzing go
whatweb 0.5.5 Fingerprint Web application fingerprinting (1800+ plugins) apt
dirsearch 0.4.3 Enumeration Multi-threaded directory/file bruteforce apt
httpx 1.3.0 Probe HTTP probing, response analysis, title/st deduplication go

Extended Tools (Highly Recommended)

Tool Category Purpose Install
hakrawler Crawler Web crawling, JS URL extraction go
waybackurls Recon Historical URL extraction from Wayback Machine go
gau Recon Multi-source URL aggregation go
gf Analysis Pattern-based grep for security findings go
naabu Network High-speed parallel port scanner go
arjun Fuzzing HTTP parameter discovery pip
nuclei Scanning YAML-based template vulnerability scanner go
interactsh OOB Out-of-band interaction tracking for blind vulns go
sqlmap Exploit Automated SQL injection detection and exploitation apt
git-dumper Recovery .git repository recovery tool pip
jwt_tool Security JWT security testing toolkit pip
wafw00f Detection WAF identification and fingerprinting pip

📖 Command Reference

/recon — Full-Spectrum Reconnaissance

Purpose: Execute comprehensive, multi-phase information gathering to map the target's complete attack surface.

Syntax: /recon <target>

Execution Phases

Phase 1 - Asset Discovery:
  Objective: Identify all owned/related assets
  Steps:
    - subfinder:      Passive enumeration from Certificate Transparency, DNS dumps, search engines
    - crt.sh:         Direct certificate transparency log query
    - waybackurls:    Historical URL extraction (archived pages)
    - gau:            Multi-source URL aggregation (Wayback, OTX, CommonCrawl)
    - Output:         Subdomain list → httpx probe → live host filtering

Phase 2 - Network Reconnaissance:
  Objective: Map exposed network services
  Steps:
    - naabu:          Fast port scan (default: top 1000 ports, configurable)
    - nmap -sC -sV:   Service version + default script scan on open ports
    - nmap -O:        OS fingerprinting (TCP/IP stack analysis)
    - Output:         Open ports → service inventory → version matrix

Phase 3 - Web Fingerprinting:
  Objective: Identify web technologies and configurations
  Steps:
    - whatweb:        Technology stack detection (CMS, JS frameworks, analytics)
    - httpx:          HTTP response analysis (status, headers, title, content-type)
    - wafw00f:        WAF detection and classification
    - Output:         Technology stack → WAF type → misconfiguration leads

Phase 4 - Directory & File Enumeration:
  Objective: Discover hidden resources and sensitive exposures
  Steps:
    - ffuf:           High-speed directory bruteforce (configurable wordlist)
    - dirsearch:      Multi-extension file discovery (.php, .asp, .bak, .env)
    - Priority:       Config files → API docs → admin panels → backups → LFI tests
    - Output:         Discovered paths → status codes → response analysis

Phase 5 - JavaScript Analysis:
  Objective: Extract API endpoints, secrets, and logic flaws from client-side code
  Steps:
    - hakrawler:      Spider → JS file discovery → URL extraction
    - gf:             Pattern matching (AWS keys, JWTs, API endpoints, debug paths)
    - regex:          Hard-coded secrets scanning (API keys, tokens, internal URLs)
    - Output:         API inventory → exposed secrets → logic clues

Phase 6 - AI Synthesis:
  Objective: Correlate findings into actionable intelligence
  Output:
    - Structured attack surface report
    - Vulnerability probability heatmap
    - Prioritized exploitation path recommendations
    - Estimated effort assessment (Low / Medium / High / Critical)
    - Recommended tool selection for validation phase

/scan — Multi-Dimensional Vulnerability Assessment

Purpose: Conduct automated vulnerability scanning across 19+ categories with context-aware verification.

Syntax: /scan <target>

  • target: Domain, IP, or specific URL path

Detection Matrix

Category Vulnerability Detection Method Confidence CVSS Range
Information Disclosure .git repository exposure git-dumper recovery + verification High 5.3-7.5
.env / configuration files Path enumeration + content analysis High 5.3-7.5
Swagger/API docs exposure Path enumeration + JSON parsing High 5.3-7.5
Source code/backup files Extension bruteforce (.bak, .zip, .tar) Medium 4.3-6.5
Hardcoded secrets in JS Regex pattern matching High 7.5-9.8
Directory listing enabled Response analysis (index of) Medium 3.3-5.3
Broken Access Control IDOR (Insecure Direct Object Reference) Parameter manipulation + response diff High 6.5-9.1
Unauthenticated API access Header removal + direct access High 7.5-9.8
Privilege escalation Role/group parameter manipulation High 7.5-9.8
Business Logic Payment manipulation Negative amounts, precision attacks Medium 4.3-7.5
Rate limiting bypass Header manipulation, IP rotation Low 3.3-5.3
Race conditions Concurrent request testing Medium 4.3-7.5
Injection SQL injection Error-based, time-blind, boolean-blind High 8.6-9.8
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Stored, reflected, DOM-based context analysis High 6.1-8.6
Server-Side Template Injection Template syntax probe High 8.6-9.8
Server-Side Request Forgery Internal IP / cloud metadata probing High 7.5-9.8
Local/Remote File Inclusion Path traversal + PHP wrapper test High 7.5-9.8
Command Injection OS command injection test vectors High 9.8
LDAP Injection LDAP query syntax injection Medium 6.5-8.6
NoSQL Injection MongoDB query operator injection Medium 6.5-8.6
File Security Arbitrary file upload Content-type bypass, extension bypass, content validation High 7.5-9.8
Arbitrary file download Path traversal + null byte injection High 7.5-9.8
Authentication Weak password policy Common password dictionary test Low 4.3-6.5
JWT vulnerabilities None algorithm, weak key, kid injection Medium 6.5-8.6
Session fixation Session token predates login Medium 4.3-6.5
OAuth misconfiguration CSRF binding, redirect_uri bypass Medium 6.5-8.6
Configuration CORS misconfiguration Origin reflection test Low 4.3-6.5
Missing security headers HTTP header audit Low 3.3-5.3
TLS/SSL weaknesses Protocol version, cipher strength Medium 4.3-7.5

Confidence Scoring

Score ≥ 90%:  Confirmed — Automated verification passed, no manual check needed
Score 70-89%: Likely — Strong indicators, manual verification recommended
Score 50-69%: Potential — Weak indicators, further investigation required
Score < 50%:  Informational — Low confidence, logged for context

/attack-surface — Attack Surface Analysis & Path Mapping

Purpose: Synthesize reconnaissance data into a structured attack surface map with prioritized exploitation paths.

Syntax: /attack-surface <target>

Output Structure:

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                   Attack Surface Report                      │
├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Target: example.com                                         │
│ Methodology: PTES v2.0                                      │
├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                             │
│  1. NETWORK FOOTPRINT                                       │
│     ├── Ports: 5 open  (80, 443, 22, 8080, 8443)           │
│     ├── Services: Apache 2.4.49, OpenSSH 7.9, Tomcat 9.0   │
│     ├── OS: Linux 5.x (Ubuntu 20.04)                       │
│     └── Notable: Apache 2.4.49 → CVE-2021-41773 (Path Trv) │
│                                                             │
│  2. WEB APPLICATION INVENTORY                               │
│     ├── Primary: WordPress 5.8.1 (8 known CVEs)            │
│     ├── API: /api/v2 (RESTful, no auth on 12 endpoints)    │
│     ├── WAF: Cloudflare (bypass: origin IP discovery)      │
│     └── Staging: dev.example.com (WordPress 5.2, outdated) │
│                                                             │
│  3. SUBDOMAIN & ASSET MAP                                   │
│     ├── 23 live subdomains discovered                       │
│     ├── 3 admin panels (admin, portal, dashboard)           │
│     └── 2 dev/staging environments (dev, staging)           │
│                                                             │
│  4. SENSITIVE EXPOSURES                                     │
│     ├── [CRIT] /.git/config exposed                         │
│     ├── [HIGH] /swagger/ API documentation                  │
│     ├── [HIGH] JS hardcoded AWS key (AKIA[XXX])            │
│     └── [MED]  /.env file accessible                        │
│                                                             │
│  5. ATTACK PATHS (sorted by exploitability × impact)        │
│                                                             │
│     PATH 1 [Score: 92%] ──── CRITICAL                       │
│     ├── Entry: AWS key from JS → S3 bucket enumeration      │
│     ├── Exploit: Bucket write permissions → web shell       │
│     └── Impact: Full server compromise                      │
│                                                             │
│     PATH 2 [Score: 78%] ──── HIGH                           │
│     ├── Entry: WordPress 5.8.1 + outdated plugins           │
│     ├── Exploit: CVE-2021-24406 → authenticated RCE         │
│     └── Impact: Server-level access                         │
│                                                             │
│     PATH 3 [Score: 65%] ──── MEDIUM                         │
│     ├── Entry: .git leak → source code review               │
│     ├── Exploit: DB creds in config → data exfiltration     │
│     └── Impact: Database compromise                         │
│                                                             │
│  6. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS                                     │
│     ├── Immediate: Validate AWS key scope & permissions     │
│     ├── Short-term: Exploit Apache path traversal           │
│     └── Medium-term: WordPress plugin vulnerability scan    │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

/check — Single-Point Vulnerability Verification

Purpose: Rapidly test a specific URL or endpoint for common vulnerability classes.

Syntax: /check <url> [options]

Examples:

/check https://target.com/api/user?id=1
/check https://target.com/login
/check https://target.com/upload
/check https://target.com/api/v2/endpoint

Verification Matrix:

Test Category Indicators Response Time
Unauthenticated Access Access Control 200 OK without auth headers < 1s
SQL Injection Injection Error messages, timing differences, boolean diffs 2-5s
Reflected XSS Injection Payload returned in response body < 1s
Path Traversal File Security /etc/passwd content in response < 1s
Sensitive Data Exposure Information Credit cards, PII, secrets in response < 1s
Parameter Pollution Logic Different response with multiple parameters 1-2s
Open Redirect Logic Location header reflects user input < 1s
Rate Limiting Configuration Multiple requests without throttling 3-5s

/fuzz — Parameter & Endpoint Fuzzing

Purpose: Discover hidden parameters, endpoints, and potential injection points through automated fuzzing.

Syntax: /fuzz <target> [mode]

  • mode: params (parameter discovery) | headers (header injection) | custom (user-defined)
/fuzz https://target.com/api params
/fuzz https://target.com/ headers

/report — Professional Report Generation

Purpose: Generate a comprehensive penetration testing report compiled from all findings during the session.

Syntax: /report [format]

  • format: full (default), executive (management summary), technical (detailed technical)

Report Sections:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                  PENETRATION TEST REPORT                      │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Classification: CONFIDENTIAL                                 │
│ Report ID: CLAUDESEC-2026-0001                               │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                              │
│  1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                        │
│     ├── Background & Objectives                              │
│     ├── Scope & Methodology (PTES v2.0)                     │
│     ├── Overall Risk Rating                                  │
│     ├── Key Findings Summary (High/Med/Low count)            │
│     └── Strategic Recommendations                            │
│                                                              │
│  2. TECHNICAL FINDINGS                                       │
│     ├── [CRITICAL] Vulnerability H-01                        │
│     │   ├── CVE Reference / OWASP Category                   │
│     │   ├── CVSS 3.1 Score & Vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/..)│
│     │   ├── Description & Impact Analysis                    │
│     │   ├── Reproduction Steps (HTTP request/response)       │
│     │   └── Remediation Recommendation                       │
│     ├── [HIGH] Vulnerability H-02 ...                        │
│     ├── [MEDIUM] Vulnerability M-01 ...                      │
│     └── [LOW] Vulnerability L-01 ...                         │
│                                                              │
│  3. ATTACK CHAIN ANALYSIS                                    │
│     ├── Entry Point → Exploitation → Pivot → Impact          │
│     └── Compensating Controls & Mitigation Paths             │
│                                                              │
│  4. COMPLIANCE MAPPING                                       │
│     ├── PCI DSS v4.0: Sections 6.x, 11.x                    │
│     ├── ISO 27001: Annex A.12.6.1                            │
│     └── NIST SP 800-115: Discovery/Attack phases             │
│                                                              │
│  5. REMEDIATION ROADMAP                                      │
│     ├── P0: Immediate (0-7 days)                             │
│     ├── P1: Short-term (7-30 days)                           │
│     ├── P2: Medium-term (30-90 days)                         │
│     └── P3: Long-term (90+ days)                             │
│                                                              │
│  6. APPENDICES                                               │
│     ├── A: Raw Tool Output                                   │
│     ├── B: HTTP Request/Response Log                         │
│     ├── C: Wordlists & Payloads Used                         │
│     └── D: Tool Configuration                                │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

📊 Vulnerability Classification

Severity Matrix (CVSS 3.1 Base)

Severity CVSS Range Color Response SLA Example
CRITICAL 9.0 - 10.0 🔴 24 hours RCE, SQLi with data exposure, Authentication bypass
HIGH 7.0 - 8.9 🟠 72 hours SSRF to cloud metadata, LFI with file read, Stored XSS
MEDIUM 4.0 - 6.9 🟡 2 weeks Reflected XSS, CSRF, Directory listing
LOW 0.1 - 3.9 🟢 1 month Missing security headers, Banner disclosure
INFO 0.0 🔵 N/A Technology stack disclosure, Open ports inventory

OWASP Top 10 (2021) Coverage

Rank Category ClaudeSec Coverage Detection Method
A01 Broken Access Control ✅ Full /scan IDOR, unauth, priv esc tests
A02 Cryptographic Failures ✅ Full /scan TLS audit, sensitive data exposure
A03 Injection ✅ Full /scan SQLi, XSS, SSTI, SSRF, LFI, CMDi
A04 Insecure Design ✅ Partial /scan business logic, rate limiting
A05 Security Misconfiguration ✅ Full /scan default creds, headers, directory listing
A06 Vulnerable Components ✅ Full /recon fingerprint → CVE lookup
A07 Identification & Auth Failures ✅ Full /scan JWT, OAuth, brute force tests
A08 Data Integrity Failures ✅ Partial /scan deserialization, software supply chain
A09 Logging & Monitoring Failures ⚠️ Manual Report includes logging recommendations
A10 SSRF ✅ Full /scan cloud metadata, internal port scan

📐 CVSS 3.1 Scoring Guide

ClaudeSec uses a modified CVSS 3.1 scoring system for vulnerability prioritization:

Base Metric Group

Exploitability Metrics:
  AV (Attack Vector):     N(network) / A(adjacent) / L(local) / P(physical)
  AC (Attack Complexity):  L(low) / H(high)
  PR (Privileges Req):     N(none) / L(low) / H(high)
  UI (User Interaction):   N(none) / R(required)

Impact Metrics:
  C (Confidentiality):     H(high) / L(low) / N(none)
  I (Integrity):           H(high) / L(low) / N(none)
  A (Availability):        H(high) / L(low) / N(none)

ClaudeSec Context Modifiers

Modifier Adjustment Description
WAF Present -0.5 WAF may detect/prevent exploitation
Requires Auth -1.0 Attacker must have valid credentials
Public Exploit Available +1.0 Proof-of-concept code exists
Sensitive Data Exposed +1.5 Vulnerability exposes critical data
PII Involvement +2.0 Personal identifiable information at risk

Scoring Examples

Example: SQL Injection on login endpoint
  CVSS Base:    AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H → 9.8 (CRITICAL)
  Modification: Public exploit available (+1.0)
  Final Score:  9.8 (already capped at maximum)

Example: Reflected XSS on error page
  CVSS Base:    AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N → 5.4 (MEDIUM)
  Modification: None
  Final Score:  5.4 (MEDIUM)

📝 Report Standard

All ClaudeSec reports follow the PEN-300/OSCP-style reporting standard adapted for AI-assisted testing:

Report Format Requirements

  1. Clear Reproduction Steps: Each finding must include exact HTTP request/response pairs
  2. Risk-Rated Findings: All vulnerabilities scored using CVSS 3.1
  3. Remediation Guidance: Actionable fix recommendations with references
  4. Attack Chain Context: How individual findings relate to overall risk posture
  5. Raw Evidence: Complete tool output appended for validation

Professional Output Deliverables

  • Markdown Report: Full technical report (default)
  • Executive Summary: Management-focused risk overview
  • Remediation Roadmap: Prioritized fix timeline

⚖️ Responsible Disclosure

Vulnerability Disclosure Workflow

┌─────────┐   ┌──────────┐   ┌──────────┐   ┌──────────┐   ┌──────────┐
│ Discover│──▶│ Validate │──▶│ Document │──▶│ Disclose │──▶│ Publish  │
│  Vuln   │   │ Confirm  │   │  Report  │   │  Vendor  │   │  CVE     │
└─────────┘   └──────────┘   └──────────┘   └──────────┘   └──────────┘
                                                   │
                                                   ▼
                                            ┌──────────┐
                                            │ Cooperate │
                                            │  Fix      │
                                            └──────────┘

Disclosure Timeline (Standard)

Day Action
Day 0 Vulnerability confirmed
Day 1-7 Report preparation, reproduction steps verified
Day 8 Initial vendor notification (encrypted email)
Day 14 Follow-up if no response
Day 30 Escalate to security contacts
Day 45 Public disclosure if no fix (after good-faith effort)
Day 90 CVE publication (coordinated)

🛡️ Legal & Ethics

ClaudeSec is designed for and restricted to:
  ✓ Authorized penetration testing engagements
  ✓ CTF competitions and wargames  
  ✓ Self-hosted laboratory environments
  ✓ Bug bounty programs (in-scope targets only)
  ✓ Security research on your own infrastructure

Unauthorized use of this framework may violate:
  • Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) — US
  • Computer Misuse Act 1990 — UK  
  • Cybersecurity Law of the People's Republic of China
  • Similar laws in other jurisdictions

Users assume all legal responsibility for their actions.

🤝 Contributing

We welcome contributions that align with ethical security research:

  1. Bug Reports: Open an issue with detailed reproduction steps
  2. Feature Requests: Describe the use case and expected behavior
  3. Pull Requests: Ensure code follows existing patterns and adds value
  4. Documentation: Improvements to README, comments, or wiki

Guidelines

  • All contributions must support legal and ethical security testing
  • No malicious code, backdoors, or harmful payloads
  • Follow responsible disclosure for any security issues found in the project
  • Maintain compatibility with existing toolchain

📄 License

This project is licensed under the MIT License — see LICENSE for details.


ClaudeSec — Intelligent Security Testing, Powered by AI
For authorized security testing and academic research purposes only.

About

AI-Driven White Hat Security Testing Framework

Resources

License

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

 
 
 

Contributors

Languages