[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-572804-105":53,"doc-detail-572804-en":126},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":59,"keywords":60,"description":61,"schema_data":62,"social_meta":119,"head_meta":121,"extra_data":123,"updated_unix":125},105,"en","premium-owasp-penetration-testing-report-for-web-platform","Premium OWASP Penetration Testing Report for Web Platform","","Premium OWASP penetration testing report for a web platform, presenting results from a full black-box engagement. The document summarizes a kick-off, scope definition by target URLs, and validation steps to avoid missing out-of-scope systems or accounts. It details the security evaluation methodology using OWASP WSTG and records findings by severity, including high-risk issues such as archive file name enumeration and a rate-limit abuse enabling DoS of an API. Additional medium and low items are described with context, impact, and mitigations.",{"@graph":63,"@context":118},[64,80,101],{"@type":65,"itemListElement":66},"BreadcrumbList",[67,71,74,77],{"item":68,"name":69,"@type":70,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":72,"name":10,"@type":70,"position":73},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":75,"name":51,"@type":70,"position":76},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/general/",3,{"item":78,"name":59,"@type":70,"position":79},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/premium-owasp-penetration-testing-report-for-web-platform/572804/",4,{"url":78,"name":59,"@type":81,"image":82,"author":87,"headline":59,"publisher":90,"fileFormat":93,"inLanguage":57,"description":61,"dateModified":94,"datePublished":95,"encodingFormat":93,"isAccessibleForFree":96,"interactionStatistic":97},"DigitalDocument",{"url":83,"@type":84,"width":85,"height":86},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/premium-owasp-penetration-testing-report-for-web-platform/572804.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":88,"@type":89},"AfterMidnight","Person",{"url":68,"name":91,"@type":92},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-16","2026-10-13",true,{"@type":98,"interactionType":99,"userInteractionCount":47},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":100},"ViewAction",{"@type":102,"mainEntity":103},"FAQPage",[104,110,114],{"name":105,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":107},"What testing methodology and standard did the team use?","Question",{"text":108,"@type":109},"The team used OWASP WSTG as the technical standard and selected specific OWASP tests after understanding the system.","Answer",{"name":111,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":112},"What high-risk vulnerabilities were found?",{"text":113,"@type":109},"One issue enables anonymous attackers to enumerate archive file names and access those files. Another issue allows attackers to abuse the rate limit mechanism to DoS the API.",{"name":115,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How was the assessment scope validated?",{"text":117,"@type":109},"Before searching for vulnerabilities, the team checked that the client-defined scope was technically logical, including ensuring no overlooked servers or accounts with internet access were included outside the scope.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":78,"og:type":120,"og:title":59,"og:site_name":91,"og:description":61},"article",{"robots":122,"canonical":78},"index,follow",{"doc_id":124,"site_id":56},572804,1792085815,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":127},{"doc_id":124,"user_id":128,"nickname":88,"user_avatar":129,"doc_module":9,"category_id":50,"category_name":51,"doc_title":59,"doc_description":61,"doc_content":130,"file_id":131,"file_url":132,"file_type":133,"file_size":134,"view_count":47,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":135,"language":136,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":137,"faqs":138,"seo_title":139,"seo_description":61,"update_tm":140,"read_time":141},962090896061,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Premium OWASP Penetration Testing Report for █████████ Web Platform  \nTesters  \n1. ███████████  \n2. ████████████  \nTable of Contents  \nTable of Contents 2  \nManagement Summary 3  \nVulnerabilities by Severity 4  \nApproach 5  \nIntroduction 5  \nScope Overview 6  \nTechnical Overview 6  \nScope Validation 6  \nThreat Model 6  \nSecurity Evaluation Methodology 7  \nSecurity Assessment 8  \nIssue Table Description 9  \nSecurity Assessment Findings 14  \nStored ( Dom-based) Cross-Site Scripting 15  \nCredentials Spraying Attack 16  \nCloud Front Bypass 18  \nAbsence of Rate Limit -Brute Forcing Verification Code 20  \nBlocking New Users Registration 21  \nAccess Control -Private Information Leakage 22  \nSession Management-Session Hijacking 24  \nImproper Error Handling-Backend Communication Leakage 25  \nAppendix A: Security Evaluation Fixes 26  \n2  \nManagement Summary  \n█████████ contacted Sayfer Security in order to perform full black-box penetration testing on the █████████  \nBefore assessing these services we held a kickoff meeting with the technical team and received an overview of the system and the goals for this assessment.  \nOver the assessment, we discovered 8 vulnerabilities in the system, 2 of which are at high risk. The fi rst vulnerability lets an anonymous attacker enumerate archive file names and get access to these files.  \nThe second vulnerability lets an anonymous attacker to DoS the ███████ API by abusing the rate limit mechanism.  \nOther vulnerabilities do not have a high impact on the system but should be fixed and these are described in this report in more technical details.  \n3  \nVulnerabilities by Severity  \n| Severity | Low | Medium | High | Informational |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| \\# of issues | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 |\n\n● High – Direct threat to key business processes.  \n● Medium – Indirect threat to key business processes or partial threat to business processes.  \n● Low – No direct threat exists. The vulnerability may be exploited using other vulnerabilities.  \n● Informational – This fi nding does not indicate vulnerability, but states a comment that notifies about design flaws and improper implementation that might cause a problem in the long run.  \n4  \nApproach  \nIntroduction  \n██████████ contacted Sayfer Security in order to perform full black-box penetration testing for ████████████████████  \nThis report documents a security assessment carried out by Sayfer targeting both applications.  \nParticularly, this report displays the security posture review for both applications and their surrounding infrastructure and process implementations.  \nOur penetration testing project life cycle:  \n5  \nScope Overview  \nDuring our fi rst meeting with ███████████, after understanding the company's needs, we defi ned the application’s scope that resides at the following URLs as the scope of the project:  \n●●  \n●  \n████████████  \n█████████████████████  \n███████████  \nOur tests were performed between ██████████████  \nTechnical Overview  \n████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ .  \n█████████████████████████████████████████████  \n███████████████████████████  \n██████████████████████████████████████████████████████  \n████████████████████████████████████████████████████  \n██████████████████████████████████████████████████  \n████████████████████████████████████  \nScope Validation  \nBefore starting looking for security vulnerabilities we made sure the scope defi ned to us by the client was technically logical.  \nit is a very common mistake to forget an old server or account connected to the internet with permissions to access or control the system that is being audited under the defi ned scope.  \nBy performing the scope validation we made sure that there are no unknown risks to the tested system.  \nThreat Model  \nDuring our kickoff meetings with the client, we defi ned the most important assets the application possesses.  \n█████████████████████████████████████████████  \n████████████████████████████████████████████████████████","cbCaisIAOK6g55Ud","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaisIAOK6g55Ud","pdf",504221,25,"English","# Management Summary\n# Vulnerabilities by Severity\n# Approach\n## Introduction\n## Scope Overview\n## Technical Overview\n## Scope Validation\n## Threat Model\n## Security Evaluation Methodology\n# Security Assessment\n## Issue Table Description\n# Security Evaluation","[{\"question\":\"What testing methodology and standard did the team use?\",\"answer\":\"The team used OWASP WSTG as the technical standard and selected specific OWASP tests after understanding the system.\"},{\"question\":\"What high-risk vulnerabilities were found?\",\"answer\":\"One issue enables anonymous attackers to enumerate archive file names and access those files. Another issue allows attackers to abuse the rate limit mechanism to DoS the API.\"},{\"question\":\"How was the assessment scope validated?\",\"answer\":\"Before searching for vulnerabilities, the team checked that the client-defined scope was technically logical, including ensuring no overlooked servers or accounts with internet access were included outside the scope.\"}]","Premium OWASP Penetration Testing Report for Web Platform | PDF",1791929322,9]