hunt-tls-network

> **⚠️ AUTHORIZED USE ONLY**

> This skill is for educational purposes or authorized security assessments only.

> You must have explicit, written permission from the system owner before using this tool.

> Misuse of this tool is illegal and strictly prohibited.

> **Mandatory confirmation gate**

> Before running any command that probes, exploits, changes, persists on, extracts data from, or attempts credential access against a target:

> 1. Ask the user to state the exact target URL, IP, account, or resource.

> 2. Ask the user to confirm written authorization and the permitted scope.

> 3. Show the exact command(s) and explain their expected effect.

> 4. Wait for explicit confirmation in the current conversation.

>

> Without that confirmation, remain read-only and provide defensive guidance only. Prefer a sandbox, disposable VM, or controlled lab.

# HUNT-TLS-NETWORK — TLS/SSL & DNS Security

Reality Check (Read First)

Most findings in this class are **Info/Low and routinely rejected** as "best-practice" / "missing-hardening" by triage. This skill exists to stop you wasting a submission. Two questions before you report anything here:

1. **Is there a real victim and a real action?** "Missing HSTS" is not a vulnerability — *demonstrated session-cookie capture from a victim you MitM'd* is. "Missing CAA" is never a vulnerability you can demonstrate.

2. **Does the program accept it?** Many programs explicitly list missing SPF/DMARC, missing security headers, weak ciphers without exploit, and CAA as **out of scope**. Read scope first; quote the in-scope line in your report.

**What actually pays in this class (in order):**

- **Dangling-CNAME / dangling-A subdomain takeover** — you control content on `target.com` subdomain. Real impact, real bounty. (Owned in depth by `hunt-subdomain`; covered here for the TLS/DNS recon angle.)

- **Spoofable DMARC, proven by delivered-to-inbox email** — not "p=none exists" but an actual mail from `ceo@target.com` landing in a real inbox with a passing/none DMARC verdict in the headers.

- **DNS AXFR returning internal hosts** — full internal hostname/IP map. Concrete recon value, often Medium.

- **mTLS / client-cert bypass on an internal service** — reaching authenticated-only functionality without the cert. Real auth bypass = High.

- **Exploited TLS weakness with a working decrypt/MitM PoC** — almost never achievable remotely in 2024-2026 against a patched stack; see Phase 1 caveats.

**What does NOT pay (do not report standalone):** missing CAA, missing HSTS with no MitM PoC, missing security headers alone, weak-cipher *support* without an exploit, self-signed cert on a non-prod host, TLS 1.0/1.1 *enabled* without a downgrade victim.

---

Phase 1 — TLS/SSL Audit

# Quick TLS test with testssl.sh
brew install testssl
testssl.sh --fast $TARGET 2>/dev/null | grep -E "CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|OK|NOT" | head -30

# Or use sslyze (Python)
pip3 install sslyze
python3 -m sslyze $TARGET --json_out /tmp/sslyze_$TARGET.json 2>/dev/null
cat /tmp/sslyze_$TARGET.json | python3 -m json.tool | grep -i "vulnerability\|insecure\|error" | head -20

# Check certificate expiry and chain
echo | openssl s_client -connect $TARGET:443 -servername $TARGET 2>/dev/null | \
  openssl x509 -noout -dates -subject -issuer 2>/dev/null

# Check for weak ciphers manually (a successful handshake = the cipher is OFFERED, not exploitable)
openssl s_client -connect $TARGET:443 -cipher RC4-SHA 2>/dev/null | grep -i "cipher\|handshake"
openssl s_client -connect $TARGET:443 -cipher DES-CBC3-SHA 2>/dev/null | grep -i "cipher\|handshake"

# Protocol downgrade surface — TLS 1.0/1.1 still negotiable?
openssl s_client -connect $TARGET:443 -tls1   2>/dev/null | grep -E "Protocol|Cipher"
openssl s_client -connect $TARGET:443 -tls1_1 2>/dev/null | grep -E "Protocol|Cipher"

**Accuracy / triage notes — do not over-claim TLS bugs:**

- **Offered ≠ exploitable.** testssl/sslyze flagging RC4, 3DES, or TLS 1.0 means the server *negotiates*