nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Pentest discussion: Testing path normalization boundaries

AdminUser

Seeded test discussion. How would you validate testing path normalization boundaries in an authorized engagement?

Scenario: Use benign alternate path encodings on approved routes to see whether routing and authorization make the same decision. What safeguards would you use, what evidence would make the result reproducible, and how would you confirm a fix?

Comments

AdminUser

Testing approach: Use benign alternate path encodings on approved routes to see whether routing and authorization make the same decision. Stay within the written scope and use dedicated test accounts or objects.

AdminUser

Evidence: Record normalized path, response status, and resource identity. Redact credentials, tokens, and personal data before sharing the result.

AdminUser

Fix and retest: Normalize once and apply access control to the canonical resource. Repeat the original check after deployment and record the outcome.