A penetration tester is evaluating a new API endpoint that retrieves user profile data, for example, GET /api/v1/users/{userId}. The tester suspects that by manipulating the userId parameter, they might be able to access the profiles of other users. Which of the following approaches is the most direct and effective way to confirm this specific API abuse vulnerability?
Run an automated vulnerability scanner against the host to identify missing security patches.
Analyze the API's response headers for verbose server version information.
Systematically iterate through different userId values in requests to the endpoint and analyze the responses for unauthorized data access.
Fuzz the API endpoint with a large set of random, malformed inputs to trigger a denial of service.
The most effective method to verify an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability is to systematically manipulate the identifier parameter (userId) and check if the API returns data belonging to other users. This directly tests the endpoint's authorization controls. Analyzing response headers might reveal other types of information disclosure but does not test the access control logic for this specific function. Fuzzing for a denial-of-service condition or running a host-based vulnerability scan are valid security tests, but they address different types of risks (availability and system patching, respectively) and would not confirm the suspected data access flaw.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is an IDOR vulnerability?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why is systematically manipulating `userId` values effective in finding IDOR vulnerabilities?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does fuzzing differ from systematically testing `userId` for vulnerabilities?