Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Import Proxy History at startup #71

Closed
ghost opened this issue Jul 13, 2020 · 9 comments
Closed

Import Proxy History at startup #71

ghost opened this issue Jul 13, 2020 · 9 comments

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 13, 2020

Hi,
thanks for the great tool!

As a suggestion I would like to see an option to import proxy history at startup so that I do not lose all the HUNT entries after having closed Burp.
Something like that is already implemented in Logger++ if you want to take a look.

Thanks in advance!

@cak
Copy link
Contributor

cak commented Jul 13, 2020

👋 @simonebovi!

That is an awesome feature request!

I'll work on getting that added in for the next release. I'll keep you posted on the status and when there is a beta to test!

🍻

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jul 16, 2020

A caveat is that this would not consider any deleted HUNT entries.

A better way would be to find a way to automatically save the latest status of HUNT and then reload that (if wanted) at the next startup, so to not lose all the previous work done :)

@cak
Copy link
Contributor

cak commented Jul 17, 2020

Thanks, that would be awesome. I'm not sure if/how we can do that with the current Burp Extender API (other than saving simple data points like options), have you seen any extensions save their state? The only trick I know is to use the proxy history comments, but I'll see what I can find out!

@cak
Copy link
Contributor

cak commented Jul 17, 2020

@simonebovi I was able to work out a draft addressing the loading proxy history and duplicates, if possible could you check out the release here for the updates:
https://github.com/cak/HUNT/releases/tag/2.3

Let me know your thoughts, if the changes work I'll then open a PR to this repo. 🚀

(I'm still working on the state issue, but I at least wanted to make the other changes)

Thanks again! 🥳

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jul 17, 2020

Hi,
just tried the new version.

Import proxy history function works really great and also catches pretty well the duplicates too!

Related to duplicates, if we want to improve this thing more, we could try to implement something like this.

If I have two URLs:

  1. https://[HOST]/eligibility?intent=SALESCHAT&page=/it/home
  2. https://[HOST_2]/eligibility?intent=SALESCHAT&page=/it/home

These 2 should be the same URL logically.
I am not sure that an algorithm could verify this 100% correctly and for me it is better to have some semi-manual approach instead.

I don't know if it is possible but it would be great if we can manually select multiple similar logic URLs so to regroup them on a single entry, conceptually similar to what is done on Burp issues:
image

This way it should be easier to avoid logical duplicates too after having firstly ordered the entries by the param name.
Also if we test the parameter and we find it is a false positive, it should be easy to just delete the group with a single action.

Not sure if this is clear.

And let's hope for the best regarding the state saving!

Thanks again!

@cak
Copy link
Contributor

cak commented Jul 18, 2020

Thanks @simonebovi, for all your help!

I have added an option to ignore host when processing duplicates (issue #72), can you please check the updated release:
https://github.com/cak/HUNT/releases/tag/2.3

Let me know if this works to satisfy a couple of these requests, if so I'll PR the updates to the main repo (here).

Maybe we should move state saving to another issue?

@cak cak mentioned this issue Jul 18, 2020
@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jul 18, 2020 via email

@cak
Copy link
Contributor

cak commented Oct 8, 2020

@simonebovi Did you have a chance to check out the latest version of HUNT (2.3)? If so, can we close this issue? 🤩

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Oct 8, 2020

Yes @cak,
it works great!

Thank you very much again! You rock!

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Oct 8, 2020
This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant