SkillAgentSearch skills...

hunt-ntlm-info

Hunt NTLM/Negotiate information disclosure on internet-reachable IIS/SharePoint/Exchange. Anonymous NTLM Type-2 challenge capture leaks NetBIOS domain, internal DNS forest, computer name, AD timestamp via AV_PAIRS structure.

Install / Use

npx skills add elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter --skill hunt-ntlm-info

Installs into whichever agent you are using.

About this skill
📄

SKILL.md

Installable skill definition

Quality Score

96/100

Supported Platforms

Zed

Our assessment of hunt-ntlm-info

hunt-ntlm-info scores 96/100 on our quality scale, 201st of 3,168 Development & Engineering skills we index (top 7%).

Its SKILL.md is 16 KB long, well organised into 14 sections with 6 code examples: a thorough specification that gives an agent plenty to work with.

With 4,669 GitHub stars, it is one of the more widely adopted skills in the catalogue.

Substance
30/30
Structure
20/20
Description
15/15
Adoption
16/20
Freshness
15/15

Maintenance, license and trust

  • The repository was last updated 2 days ago, so hunt-ntlm-info is actively maintained.
  • It is released under the MIT license, a permissive license that allows use, modification and commercial use with attribution.
  • Its trust signals score 100/100, with no cautions. These come from repository metadata, not a code audit — read the skill file before letting an agent act on it.

hunt-ntlm-info compared with similar skills

All 4 of these similar skills score higher than hunt-ntlm-info; compare them before choosing.

SkillScoreStarsUpdatedFormat
hunt-ntlm-info (this skill)by elementalsouls964.7k2d agoSKILL.md
Agent-Reachby Panniantong10085.9k13d agoCLAUDE.md
ai-job-searchby MadsLorentzen10044.3ktodayCLAUDE.md
claude-howtoby luongnv8910041.7k2d agoCLAUDE.md
algorithmic-artby anthropics100177.9k5d agoSKILL.md

Frequently asked questions

How do I install hunt-ntlm-info?
Run npx skills add elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter --skill hunt-ntlm-info. The install tabs above show the steps for each supported agent.
Which AI agents does hunt-ntlm-info work with?
It is written for Zed, as a SKILL.md file. Other agents that read the same format can often use it too.
Is hunt-ntlm-info safe to use?
It is MIT-licensed and scores 100/100 on trust signals. Skills are instructions an agent will follow, so read the file before installing it and do not approve commands you do not understand.
Is hunt-ntlm-info still maintained?
The repository was last updated 2 days ago, so hunt-ntlm-info is actively maintained.

name: hunt-ntlm-info description: "Hunt NTLM/Negotiate information disclosure on internet-reachable IIS/SharePoint/Exchange. Anonymous NTLM Type-2 challenge capture leaks NetBIOS domain, internal DNS forest, computer name, AD timestamp via AV_PAIRS structure. Default Windows-installer hostnames (WIN-XXXXXXXXXXX pattern) signal lazy provisioning. Use when target advertises WWW-Authenticate: NTLM or Negotiate headers anonymously." sources: github, authorized-engagement report_count: 1

Crown Jewel Targets

NTLM info disclosure is a Medium-severity finding when chained to context — the leak itself is intentional protocol behavior (RFC-compliant NTLMSSP challenge), but on internet-exposed enterprise infrastructure it provides exact reconnaissance for the next stage of an attack. Highest-value targets:

  • Internet-reachable IIS / SharePoint / Exchange / OWA with dual-auth (Forms + NTLM, or NTLM + Kerberos)
  • Citrix NetScaler / VMware Horizon View internet-facing gateways with NTLM-backed AD auth
  • Lync / Skype for Business / Teams On-Prem edge servers
  • WSUS / Windows Update Services with NTLM-protected admin paths
  • CIFS-style fileshare proxies (HCL Sametime, IBM Notes Domino) that proxy NTLM
  • Legacy SharePoint farms that left NTLM enabled on the public-zone IIS binding

What makes this pay:

  • Internal AD domain disclosure (parent-forest mapping, e.g. customer.parent-corp.example → tenant inside corporate-AD tree)
  • Default-Windows-hostname disclosure (WIN-XXXXXXXXXXX pattern signals rushed provisioning → likely default service-account passwords)
  • Timestamp leak (used in NTLMv2 hash cracking acceleration)
  • Direct attack-map enrichment for credential spraying combined with hunt-auth-bypass Legacy-Protocol Matrix

Attack Surface Signals

Response headers signaling NTLM availability:

WWW-Authenticate: NTLM
WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate
WWW-Authenticate: NTLM, Negotiate
WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate, NTLM

URL patterns where NTLM is commonly exposed:

/_api/web/CurrentUser                  (SharePoint REST)
/_vti_bin/*.asmx                       (SharePoint legacy SOAP)
/EWS/Exchange.asmx                     (Exchange Web Services)
/Autodiscover/Autodiscover.xml         (Exchange autodiscover)
/owa/                                  (Outlook Web App)
/Microsoft-Server-ActiveSync           (ActiveSync)
/PowerShell                            (Exchange Mgmt Shell over HTTPS)
/api/v3/                               (TeamCity, Atlassian)
/wsus/                                 (Windows Server Update Services)
/manager/html                          (some Tomcat behind IIS)
/iisstart.htm                          (default IIS, sometimes reveals NTLM upstream)

Tech-stack signals:

  • IIS on the public internet (almost always NTLM-capable, even if Forms is the front)
  • SharePoint Web Front End (almost always dual-auth Forms + NTLM)
  • Exchange edge transport
  • Server header Microsoft-HTTPAPI/2.0, Microsoft-IIS/*, IIS/*

Step-by-Step Hunting Methodology

  1. Probe every anonymous endpoint for WWW-Authenticate: NTLM. Send a vanilla GET and inspect response headers. If NTLM is offered, proceed.

  2. Send a valid NTLMSSP Type-1 message anonymously. The Type-1 base64 below requests NetBIOS-domain and Workstation info from the server:

    Authorization: NTLM TlRMTVNTUAABAAAAB4IIogAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAbEdAAAADw==
    

    This is the standard test Type-1 with negotiate flags NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_UNICODE | NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_OEM | NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_NTLM | NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_ALWAYS_SIGN | NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_KEY_EXCH | NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_56 | NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_128 | NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_TARGET_INFO. The OS Version field (06 01 B1 1D 00 00 00 0F) is Windows 7 build 7601 — accepted by virtually every NTLM responder.

  3. Use a keep-alive raw socket, not Python requests / curl one-shot. Most HTTP libraries close the connection between the Type-1 send and Type-2 reception. Use one of:

    • Burp Repeater with Connection: keep-alive set explicitly
    • Burp mcp__burp__send_http1_request (handles keep-alive natively)
    • Python raw socket + ssl.wrap_socket (see Payload section)
  4. Parse the Type-2 challenge from the WWW-Authenticate: NTLM <base64> response header. Base64-decode the value. The structure is NTLMSSP per MS-NLMP:

    • Bytes 0-7: literal NTLMSSP\0
    • Bytes 8-11: MessageType = \x02\x00\x00\x00
    • Bytes 12-19: TargetName SecurityBuffer (len, alloc, offset)
    • Bytes 20-23: NegotiateFlags
    • Bytes 24-31: Server Challenge (8 bytes — useful for offline cracking)
    • Bytes 40-47: TargetInfo SecurityBuffer (len, alloc, offset)
    • TargetInfo body: AV_PAIRS array of (AvId u16, AvLen u16, Value)
  5. Decode the AV_PAIRS. The AvIds you care about:

    • 1 = NetBIOS Computer Name
    • 2 = NetBIOS Domain Name
    • 3 = DNS Computer Name (FQDN of the responding server)
    • 4 = DNS Domain Name (the AD domain)
    • 5 = DNS Tree Name (the AD forest root)
    • 7 = Timestamp (FILETIME, useful for NTLMv2 hash relay / cracking)
    • 9 = Target Name (in newer NTLMSSP)
  6. Map findings to severity tier:

    • Internet-exposed + default WIN-XXXXXXXXXXX hostname + corporate-AD-tree disclosure → Medium
    • Internet-exposed + named-server hostname (SPWEB01.corp.example) + corporate-AD-tree → Low-Medium
    • Intranet-only + any disclosure → Informational
    • Combine with hunt-auth-bypass Legacy-Protocol Matrix findings on the same host → upgrade the auth-bypass finding's severity since the attacker has UPN/SAM format ready
  7. Check the timestamp. If AV[7] returns a current FILETIME within ~5s of Date: header, the system clock is synced — useful intel for Kerberos golden-ticket forging (out of bug-bounty scope but red-team relevant).

  8. Cross-reference with subdomain enum. The DNS Tree name often reveals the parent forest — e.g. customer.parent-corp.example reveals the customer is a sub-domain INSIDE corporate-parent AD, not a separate tenant. This is a privacy / topology-disclosure escalation that programs sometimes accept as Medium.


Payload & Detection Patterns

Generic NTLM Type-1 anonymous probe (curl + raw socket fallback):

# Most one-shot curl runs DON'T return Type-2 because the connection closes.
# Use this as a quick probe to confirm NTLM is offered:
curl -sk -I -H "Authorization: NTLM TlRMTVNTUAABAAAAB4IIogAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAbEdAAAADw==" \
  "https://target.example/_api/web/CurrentUser" 2>&1 | grep -i "WWW-Authenticate"

Burp send_http1_request (recommended for full Type-2 capture):

GET /_api/web/CurrentUser HTTP/1.1
Host: target.example
Authorization: NTLM TlRMTVNTUAABAAAAB4IIogAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAbEdAAAADw==
Connection: keep-alive
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0

Python raw socket + AV_PAIR decoder:

import socket, ssl, base64, struct, re
from datetime import datetime, timezone

HOST = "target.example"
ctx = ssl.create_default_context()
ctx.check_hostname = False
ctx.verify_mode = ssl.CERT_NONE

s = ctx.wrap_socket(socket.create_connection((HOST, 443)), server_hostname=HOST)
s.sendall(
    f"GET /_api/web/CurrentUser HTTP/1.1\r\n"
    f"Host: {HOST}\r\n"
    "Authorization: NTLM TlRMTVNTUAABAAAAB4IIogAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAbEdAAAADw==\r\n"
    "User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0\r\nConnection: keep-alive\r\n\r\n".encode()
)
data = b""
while True:
    chunk = s.recv(8192)
    if not chunk: break
    data += chunk
    if b"\r\n\r\n" in data: break

m = re.search(rb"WWW-Authenticate:\s*NTLM\s+([A-Za-z0-9+/=]{20,})", data, re.I)
if m:
    b = base64.b64decode(m.group(1).decode("ascii"))
    assert b[:8] == b"NTLMSSP\x00"
    tn_len, _, tn_off = struct.unpack_from('<HHI', b, 12)
    ti_len, _, ti_off = struct.unpack_from('<HHI', b, 40)
    print(f"TargetName: {b[tn_off:tn_off+tn_len].decode('utf-16-le', errors='ignore')!r}")
    av_types = {1:'NetBIOS Computer Name', 2:'NetBIOS Domain Name',
                3:'DNS Computer Name', 4:'DNS Domain Name',
                5:'DNS Tree Name', 7:'Timestamp', 9:'Target Name'}
    i = 0
    ti = b[ti_off:ti_off+ti_len]
    while i < len(ti):
        av_id, av_len = struct.unpack_from('<HH', ti, i)
        if av_id == 0: break
        val = ti[i+4:i+4+av_len]
        if av_id == 7:
            ts = struct.unpack('<Q', val[:8])[0]
            secs = (ts - 116444736000000000) / 10000000
            vs = datetime.fromtimestamp(secs, tz=timezone.utc).isoformat()
        else:
            vs = val.decode('utf-16-le', errors='ignore')
        print(f"  AV[{av_id}] {av_types.get(av_id, '?'):28s}: {vs!r}")
        i += 4 + av_len

Burp Collaborator NOT needed for this finding class — the data leak is in the synchronous response, not via OOB.


Common Root Causes

  1. Dual-auth IIS bindings on the public zone. Administrators leave NTLM enabled on the public-facing IIS site even when Forms auth is the intended entry point. Internal users get SSO; external attackers get the AD topology leak.

  2. Default IIS Application Pool identity left as ApplicationPoolIdentity. Combined with default hostname, signals provisioning never went past first-boot.

  3. Server never renamed from Windows-installer-generated hostname. Microsoft's default WIN-XXXXXXXXXXX 11-character pattern is the immediate tell. Sometimes also WORKGROUP\WIN-... in older boxes.

  4. Sub-domain joined to corporate forest without zone-isolation. European-integrator case: a a European importer's SharePoint test environment is a child domain inside a corporate global AD, disclosed via NTLM DNS Tree Name. The customer probably intends customer.parent-corp.example to be operationally separate but the NTLM Type-2 reveals the forest membership to anyone who probes.

  5. IIS Extended Protection NOT enabled. When <system.webServer><security><authentication><windowsAuthentication extendedProtection> is None (the default), the NTLM challenge is sent to any anonymous client. When set to Required, NTLM is restricted to authenticated callers — and the AV-pair leak is mitigated.

  6. No WindowsAuthentication removed from applicationHost.config for internet-exposed sites. SharePoint Central Admin sometimes leaves this enabled even when SP zone configuration only enables Forms.


Bypass Techniques

This skill describes a disclosure leak, not an authentication bypass. The "bypass" question is: how do defenders block this AV-pair leak while still allowing legitimate NTLM auth?

| Defense | Effectiveness | |---|---| | Disable NTLM on the public IIS binding entirely (Forms-only) | Best — eliminates the surface | | IIS Extended Protection = Required | Restricts NTLM challenge to authenticated callers; AV-pair leak mitigated | | Reverse-proxy strip WWW-Authenticate from anonymous responses | Sometimes works but breaks legitimate clients | | Rate-limit the Type-1 → Type-2 endpoint | Doesn't prevent disclosure, only slows enumeration | | Rename the Windows host from WIN-XXXXXXXXXXX | Removes the "lazy provisioning" tell; doesn't stop the leak | | Move the SP/Exchange farm to a child AD with no cross-trust to corporate | Mitigates the forest disclosure; doesn't stop the leak |

For the attacker: there's no "bypass" needed — the leak is the finding.


Gate 0 Validation

Before writing the report, confirm:

  1. What can the attacker do RIGHT NOW with this disclosure?

    • Internet-exposed + default hostname + corporate forest disclosed → Medium: attacker has UPN format for hunt-auth-bypass matrix probes, plus knows server has likely-default service accounts.
    • Intranet-only or only NetBIOS name → Informational.
  2. Does the program accept information-disclosure findings without a chained impact?

    • Many programs (Microsoft, large enterprise VDPs) DO accept this when the leaked info includes inte

Truncated for display — read the full file on GitHub.

Related Skills

View on GitHub
GitHub Stars4.7k
CategoryDevelopment
Updated2d ago
Forks704

Languages

Python

Trust signals

100/100

From repository metadata: license, adoption, age and documentation. Not a code audit — see the Safety scan above for what the skill file itself contains.

No cautions