Skip to main content
performing-web-application-vulnerability-triage Triages web application vulnerability findings from DAST/SAST scanners such as Burp Suite and ZAP, using the OWASP Risk Rating Methodology to confirm true positives, dismiss false positives, and prioritize remediation. Use when reviewing scanner output to reduce alert fatigue and rank vulnerabilities for development teams to fix.
跳到安装 Skills Marketplace 发现并探索由社区构建的 Agent Skills
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills --skill performing-web-application-vulnerability-triage命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
下载 Zip 下载中... 同仓库更多 Skills abusing-dpapi-for-credential-access Extract and decrypt Windows DPAPI-protected secrets (Credential Manager, browser logins/cookies, Wi-Fi credentials, KeePass keys) online or offline using SharpDPAPI, SharpChrome, Mimikatz, or Impacket's dpapi.py, including domain-wide decryption via the DPAPI backup key. Use during authorized red-team credential-access engagements after gaining a foothold or when triaging DPAPI blobs pulled from a host.
abusing-shadow-credentials-for-privesc Take over Active Directory accounts by writing attacker-controlled public keys to msDS-KeyCredentialLink (Shadow Credentials) with pyWhisker, Whisker, or Certipy, then authenticate via PKINIT to recover the target's NT hash without a password reset. Use when BloodHound shows GenericWrite/GenericAll/AddKeyCredentialLink over a target, as a stealthier alternative to ForceChangePassword, during authorized red-team engagements.
acquiring-disk-image-with-dd-and-dcfldd Create forensically sound bit-for-bit disk images with dd or dcfldd on a Linux forensic workstation, preserving evidence integrity through hash verification (MD5/SHA) during acquisition. Use when imaging a suspect drive, USB device, or memory card for investigation, preserving volatile disk evidence during incident response, or producing a verified copy for legal or law-enforcement proceedings before any destructive analysis.
name performing-web-application-vulnerability-triage description Triages web application vulnerability findings from DAST/SAST scanners such as Burp Suite and ZAP, using the OWASP Risk Rating Methodology to confirm true positives, dismiss false positives, and prioritize remediation. Use when reviewing scanner output to reduce alert fatigue and rank vulnerabilities for development teams to fix. domain cybersecurity subdomain vulnerability-management tags ["web-application","vulnerability-triage","owasp","dast","sast","burp-suite","zap","false-positive","risk-rating"] version 1.0 author mahipal license Apache-2.0 nist_csf ["ID.RA-01","ID.RA-02","ID.IM-02","ID.RA-06"] mitre_attack ["T1190","T1203","T1068"]
Performing Web Application Vulnerability Triage
Overview
Web application vulnerability triage is the process of reviewing findings from DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing) and SAST (Static Application Security Testing) tools to validate true positives, dismiss false positives, assign risk ratings using the OWASP Risk Rating Methodology, and prioritize remediation. Effective triage reduces alert fatigue and focuses development teams on the vulnerabilities that matter most.
When to Use
When conducting security assessments that involve performing web application vulnerability triage
When following incident response procedures for related security events
When performing scheduled security testing or auditing activities
When validating security controls through hands-on testing
Prerequisites
DAST scan results (OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite, Acunetix)
SAST scan results (Semgrep, SonarQube, Checkmarx, Snyk Code)
Python 3.9+ with requests, beautifulsoup4
Burp Suite Professional or OWASP ZAP for manual validation
DefectDojo or similar for finding management
OWASP Risk Rating Methodology
Risk Calculation
Risk = Likelihood x Impact
Likelihood Factors (0-9 scale)
Factor Group Factor Description Threat Agent Skill Level How technically skilled is the attacker? Threat Agent Motive How motivated is the attacker? Threat Agent Opportunity What resources/access are needed? Threat Agent Size How large is the potential threat agent group? Vulnerability Ease of Discovery How easy is it to find the vulnerability? Vulnerability Ease of Exploit How easy is it to exploit? Vulnerability Awareness How well known is the vulnerability? Vulnerability Intrusion Detection How likely is exploitation to be detected?
Impact Factors (0-9 scale)
Technical Confidentiality How much data could be disclosed? Technical Integrity How much data could be corrupted? Technical Availability How much service could be lost? Technical Accountability Can actions be traced to attacker? Business Financial Damage Revenue loss, regulatory fines Business Reputation Damage Brand trust erosion Business Non-compliance Regulatory violation exposure Business Privacy Violation PII/PHI exposure volume
Risk Matrix Low Impact (0-3) Medium Impact (3-6) High Impact (6-9) High Likelihood (6-9) Medium High Critical Medium Likelihood (3-6) Low Medium High Low Likelihood (0-3) Note Low Medium
Triage Process
Step 1: Categorize by OWASP Top 10 OWASP_TOP_10_2021 = {
"A01" : "Broken Access Control" ,
"A02" : "Cryptographic Failures" ,
"A03" : "Injection" ,
"A04" : "Insecure Design" ,
"A05" : "Security Misconfiguration" ,
"A06" : "Vulnerable and Outdated Components" ,
"A07" : "Identification and Authentication Failures" ,
"A08" : "Software and Data Integrity Failures" ,
"A09" : "Security Logging and Monitoring Failures" ,
"A10" : "Server-Side Request Forgery" ,
}
CWE_TO_OWASP = {
"CWE-79" : "A03" ,
"CWE-89" : "A03" ,
"CWE-78" : "A03" ,
"CWE-352" : "A01" ,
"CWE-22" : "A01" ,
"CWE-200" : "A02" ,
"CWE-327" : "A02" ,
"CWE-287" : "A07" ,
"CWE-918" : "A10" ,
"CWE-502" : "A08" ,
"CWE-611" : "A05" ,
}
Step 2: Validate True vs False Positives def triage_finding (finding ):
"""Classify finding as true_positive, false_positive, or needs_review."""
fp_indicators = [
"Content-Security-Policy header not set" ,
"X-Content-Type-Options header missing" ,
"Cookie without SameSite attribute" ,
]
for indicator in fp_indicators:
if indicator.lower() in finding.get("title" , "" ).lower():
if finding.get("severity" , "" ).lower() in ("info" , "low" ):
return "false_positive" , "Common informational finding"
if finding.get("evidence" ) and finding.get("confidence" , "" ).lower() == "certain" :
return "true_positive" , "Scanner confirmed exploitation"
if finding.get("source" ) == "sast" :
if finding.get("cwe" ) in ["CWE-89" , "CWE-78" , "CWE-79" ]:
return "needs_review" , "Injection finding requires manual code review"
return "needs_review" , "Requires manual validation"
Step 3: Risk Score Calculation def calculate_risk_score (finding, app_context ):
"""Calculate OWASP risk rating for a web application finding."""
likelihood = {
"skill_level" : 6 if finding["cwe" ] in ["CWE-89" , "CWE-79" ] else 4 ,
"motive" : 7 ,
"opportunity" : 7 if finding.get("authenticated" ) == False else 4 ,
"size" : 9 if finding.get("internet_facing" ) else 4 ,
"ease_of_discovery" : 8 if finding.get("scanner_detected" ) else 5 ,
"ease_of_exploit" : 7 if finding.get("exploit_available" ) else 4 ,
"awareness" : 6 ,
"intrusion_detection" : 3 if app_context.get("waf_enabled" ) else 8 ,
}
impact = {
"confidentiality" : 9 if "data_exposure" in finding.get("tags" , []) else 5 ,
"integrity" : 9 if finding["cwe" ] in ["CWE-89" , "CWE-78" ] else 4 ,
"availability" : 7 if "dos" in finding.get("tags" , []) else 2 ,
"accountability" : 3 if app_context.get("logging_enabled" ) else 7 ,
"financial" : 7 if app_context.get("processes_payments" ) else 3 ,
"reputation" : 6 if app_context.get("customer_facing" ) else 2 ,
"compliance" : 8 if app_context.get("pci_scope" ) else 3 ,
"privacy" : 9 if app_context.get("handles_pii" ) else 2 ,
}
likelihood_score = sum (likelihood.values()) / len (likelihood)
impact_score = sum (impact.values()) / len (impact)
risk_score = likelihood_score * impact_score
if risk_score >= 42 :
risk_level = "Critical"
elif risk_score >= 24 :
risk_level = "High"
elif risk_score >= 12 :
risk_level = "Medium"
elif risk_score >= 3 :
risk_level = "Low"
else :
risk_level = "Note"
return {
"likelihood_score" : round (likelihood_score, 1 ),
"impact_score" : round (impact_score, 1 ),
"risk_score" : round (risk_score, 1 ),
"risk_level" : risk_level,
}
Step 4: Generate Triage Report
python3 scripts/process.py \
--input zap_results.json \
--format zap \
--app-context app_config.json \
--output triage_report.json
Manual Validation Techniques
SQL Injection Validation # Test parameter with single quote
GET /search?q=test' HTTP/1.1
# Test with boolean-based payload
GET /search?q=test' AND 1=1-- HTTP/1.1
GET /search?q=test' AND 1=2-- HTTP/1.1
# Time-based verification
GET /search?q=test'; WAITFOR DELAY '0:0:5'-- HTTP/1.1
XSS Validation # Reflected XSS test
GET /search?q=<script>alert(document.domain)</script> HTTP/1.1
# Check if output is encoded
GET /search?q="><img src=x onerror=alert(1)> HTTP/1.1
# DOM-based XSS
GET /page#<img src=x onerror=alert(1)> HTTP/1.1
References