Not sure if I’m missing something here, but that scans ports on the localhost, it is not a port scan of your entire network. While that’s still crazy and not something you want, it’s not quite what you initially said, and I don’t believe they’d be able to scan outside of your machine
I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine.
It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a “server” in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack.
There’s no reason it can’t make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well.
Of course you’d need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn’t that hard.
In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you’d only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range.
If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I’d wager would cover 99% of consumer routers.
From there you could assume that it’s a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart’s content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on.
I haven’t tested this, but I don’t see why it wouldn’t work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.
Not sure if I’m missing something here, but that scans ports on the localhost, it is not a port scan of your entire network. While that’s still crazy and not something you want, it’s not quite what you initially said, and I don’t believe they’d be able to scan outside of your machine
I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine.
It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a “server” in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack.
There’s no reason it can’t make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well.
Of course you’d need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn’t that hard.
In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you’d only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range.
If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I’d wager would cover 99% of consumer routers.
From there you could assume that it’s a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart’s content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on.
I haven’t tested this, but I don’t see why it wouldn’t work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.