10 Website Hacking Methods That Put Your Site at Risk in 2025
Every 39 seconds, another website falls victim to hacking attempts. Website hacking isn’t just a threat anymore – it’s becoming an everyday reality for businesses worldwide.
The landscape of website security has evolved dramatically, with hackers developing increasingly sophisticated methods to breach even the most protected sites. In fact, recent studies show that 30,000 websites are hacked daily, leading to data breaches, financial losses, and damaged reputations.
As we enterned in 2025, cyber security experts are specifically warning about new, advanced attack vectors that traditional security measures can’t detect. From AI-powered attacks to sophisticated supply chain compromises, the threats to your website are more diverse and dangerous than ever before.
This comprehensive guide examines the 10 most critical website hacking methods you need to watch out for in 2025, along with practical steps to protect your site against these emerging threats.
Injection attacks remain the most prevalent website hacking method in 2025, with SQL injection attacks still ranking as the #3 most dangerous application security weakness 1. These attacks exploit vulnerable website code to manipulate databases and steal sensitive data directly from your website’s backend.
Image Source: Indusface
How Injection Attacks Work in 2025
Injection vulnerabilities occur when websites accept user input without proper validation. When attackers insert malicious code into input fields (such as search boxes, contact forms, or login pages), they can trick your database into executing unauthorized commands. At its core, attackers manipulate websites that construct database queries using string concatenation with user-supplied data 2. Subsequently, these flawed queries allow hackers to access, modify, or delete your critical data.
Common SQL Injection Techniques
SQL injection attacks generally fall into three categories:
- In-band/Classic Injection: The attacker uses the same channel for both executing the attack and retrieving results 3. This includes error-based attacks (exploiting database error messages) and union-based attacks (combining multiple query results).
- Blind SQL Injection: Here, attackers observe application responses to determine database structure without direct access to error messages 3. Though more time-consuming, these attacks can be particularly dangerous as they leave minimal traces.
- Out-of-band Injection: Attackers use separate channels for attack and data retrieval, often exploiting secure environments where direct database responses are blocked 3.
NoSQL Injection: The Overlooked Threat
While organizations focus on SQL databases, NoSQL databases (like MongoDB) face similar risks. NoSQL injection allows attackers to manipulate queries through:
- Syntax injection: Breaking NoSQL query syntax to execute malicious payloads 4
- Operator injection: Abusing NoSQL query operators like $where, $ne, $in, and $regex 4
Preventing Injection Vulnerabilities
To protect your website against injection attacks:
- Implement parameterized queries with bound variables instead of direct string concatenation 2
- Apply strict input validation with allowlists of permitted characters 2
- Follow the principle of least privilege for database accounts 1
- Enable proper error handling to prevent information leakage 2
- Use prepared statements to separate code from data 2
- For NoSQL databases, validate user inputs and use parameterized queries 4
Despite technological advances, injection attacks persist because many websites still use legacy code or neglect basic security practices.
Cross-site scripting attacks remain among the most dangerous website hacking methods in 2025, with research showing up to 50% of websites vulnerable to DOM-based XSS 5. As web applications become more complex, these threats have evolved beyond simple script injections.
Image Source: www.wallarm.com
Evolution of XSS Attacks
XSS has expanded from its original focus on stealing data cross-site to include injection of virtually any malicious content 6. These attacks now fall into three main categories: reflected XSS (where malicious scripts come from the current HTTP request), stored XSS (where scripts are permanently stored on target servers), and DOM-based XSS (where vulnerabilities exist in client-side code) 7. Consequently, attackers can steal cookies, impersonate users, capture login credentials, and even inject trojan functionality 7.
DOM-Based XSS: The Silent Threat
Unlike other XSS types, DOM-based XSS operates entirely on the client side—the payload never reaches the server 5. This makes detection exceptionally difficult, as traditional security monitoring and server logs cannot identify these attacks. Furthermore, DOM-based XSS exploits happen when JavaScript code takes data from an attacker-controllable source (like URLs) and passes it to sinks supporting dynamic code execution (such as innerHTML or eval()) 8. Security researchers have detected DOM XSS issues even in high-profile companies like Google, Yahoo, and Amazon 5.
XSS in Modern JavaScript Frameworks
Modern frameworks like React, Angular, and Vue provide some built-in protections but contain critical security gaps. Additionally, React’s dangerouslySetInnerHTML, Angular’s bypassSecurityTrustAs functions, and Lit’s unsafeHTML create “escape hatches” that developers must handle carefully 6. In 2025, threat actors are actively refining XSS attacks specifically targeting these frameworks 9.
XSS Protection Strategies
Effective XSS defense requires multiple layers of protection:
- Input Validation: Filter all user inputs using strict validation rules
- Output Encoding: Encode data before displaying it to prevent execution as code
- Content Security Policy (CSP): Implement restrictions on which scripts can execute
- HTML Sanitization: Use tools like DOMPurify to strip dangerous HTML 6
- AI-Enhanced Security: Organizations using AI-powered security in DevSecOps pipelines report 76% reduction in XSS vulnerabilities 10
By implementing these protections, websites can significantly reduce their vulnerability to the increasingly sophisticated cross-site scripting attacks emerging in 2025.
Cross-site scripting attacks remain among the most dangerous website hacking methods in 2025, with research showing up to 50% of websites vulnerable to DOM-based XSS 5. As web applications become more complex, these threats have evolved beyond simple script injections.
Image Source: www.esecurityplanet.com
Common API Authentication Flaws
Authentication failures consistently rank among the top OWASP API security risks, contributing to many high-profile breaches 12. Key authentication vulnerabilities include:
- Implementation of non-null value tokens where systems only check for the existence of authentication tokens rather than validating their contents 12
- Fragmented authentication approaches across different API consumers, creating inconsistent security 12
- Environment confusion where tokens from development environments gain access to production systems 12
- Missing authorization checks enabling authenticated users to access resources beyond their privileges 12
API Rate Limiting Bypasses
Rate limiting protects APIs from abuse, yet attackers have developed numerous evasion techniques. Common bypass methods include:
IP-based limitation bypasses through proxy servers that multiply attackers’ request quotas 3. For key-based systems, attackers create multiple accounts to acquire numerous API keys 3.
More sophisticated techniques involve header manipulation (X-Forwarded-For, X-Real-IP), URL case changes, adding random parameters, and protocol downgrading between HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2 1.
GraphQL Security Weaknesses
GraphQL presents unique security challenges through:
Introspection vulnerabilities where enabled introspection systems expose complete database schemas 13. Batching attacks allow multiple queries in a single request, overwhelming servers or bypassing rate limits 13. Injection risks persist in GraphQL, including SQL injection through unsanitized GraphQL queries 13.
Securing Your APIs Against Attacks
To protect against API vulnerabilities:
- Implement strong authentication and authorization with multi-factor authentication and proper token validation 14
- Apply consistent rate limiting across endpoints, tracking usage across all API keys associated with users 15
- For GraphQL, disable introspection and tools like GraphiQL in production environments 16
- Enforce input validation for all data submitted to APIs 17
- Establish comprehensive monitoring to detect suspicious patterns like systematic ID enumeration 4
Primarily, recognize that security by obscurity is ineffective—even internal APIs require robust protection to prevent evolving attack techniques 4.
Supply chain attacks represent an increasingly severe threat to website security in 2025, with experts projecting that up to 45% of organizations worldwide will experience such attacks by the end of the year 18. These sophisticated attacks target the external components your website depends on rather than attacking your site directly.
Image Source: www.techtarget.com
Third-Party Script Compromises
Nearly half of the world’s largest websites utilize externally generated JavaScript that creates an open attack vector for malicious actors 19. When a webpage calls a third-party script, it loads directly from an external server, effectively bypassing controls like perimeter firewalls and monitoring tools 19. This gives attackers a perfect opportunity to introduce malicious code.
Financial services websites are especially vulnerable, containing an average of 19 scripts on sensitive pages—60% higher than the average across all sectors 19. Likewise, healthcare organizations typically include 15 third-party scripts 19. The consequences can be devastating, as evidenced by incidents where attackers manipulated third-party scripts to steal payment card data from hundreds of millions of users 20.
Dependency Confusion Attacks
Dependency confusion (also called repository hijacking) occurs when attackers trick package managers into downloading malicious packages instead of legitimate internal dependencies 2. This attack works through several mechanisms:
- Namespacing exploitation: Uploading malicious libraries to public registries with names similar to internal libraries 2
- Version manipulation: Setting higher version numbers on malicious packages, causing package managers to preferentially select them 2
According to security researchers, almost half of organizations remain vulnerable to this type of attack, making it an increasingly common website hacking method 21.
NPM and Other Package Vulnerabilities
Modern websites typically rely on numerous external dependencies, with studies showing that up to 90% of an application may consist of third-party code and open-source software 18. Among package management systems, NPM presents particular risks. Recent analysis revealed multiple critical vulnerabilities including arbitrary file overwrite, unauthorized file access, and token leakage vulnerabilities 22.
Mitigating Supply Chain Risks
To protect your website from supply chain attacks:
- Create and maintain a Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) to track all dependencies 18
- Implement strong access controls for dependency management with role-based permissions 23
- Utilize tools like npm audit to regularly scan for vulnerabilities in dependencies 24
- Reserve package names or namespaces on public registries to prevent squatting 25
- Configure private registries with higher priority than public ones 25
Ultimately, the security of your website extends beyond your own code to include every external component it relies upon.
Authentication bypass attacks continue to plague websites in 2025, with recent studies showing cybercriminals can successfully circumvent security measures in 39% of targeted websites 26. These sophisticated techniques allow hackers to gain unauthorized access to systems without proper credentials.
Image Source: www.strongdm.com
OAuth 2.0 Implementation Flaws
OAuth 2.0 framework vulnerabilities stem primarily from implementation errors rather than protocol weaknesses. Common exploitation paths include insufficient anti-CSRF protection, improper validation of access tokens, and authentication delegation issues 27. For instance, during the authorization process, many sites fail to implement the critical “state” parameter that protects against CSRF attacks 27. Additionally, attackers can exploit scenarios where client applications don’t verify whether the access token actually belongs to the claimed user 28.
Multi-Factor Authentication Bypasses
Although MFA reduces identity compromise risk by 99%, attackers have developed several effective circumvention techniques 29. MFA fatigue attacks, or “prompt bombing,” overwhelm users with repeated authentication requests until they approve one out of frustration 30. Alternatively, man-in-the-middle attacks intercept authentication flows through proxy servers, capturing both credentials and session tokens in real-time 31. Recent data shows 50% of incident responses in early 2024 involved MFA bypass attacks 30.
Session Management Vulnerabilities
Session management weaknesses enable attackers to impersonate legitimate users through:
- Session hijacking: Capturing or predicting valid session IDs to take over user sessions
- Session fixation: Setting session IDs to known values for unauthorized access
- Session ID leakage: Exposing IDs through URLs, logs, or insecure storage
These vulnerabilities often result from inadequate session ID generation entropy, improper handling of session timeouts, or failure to regenerate IDs after privilege changes 32.
Building Robust Authentication Systems
To create resilient authentication systems:
- Implement proper OAuth configurations with PKCE extension for public clients
- Enforce secure session handling with random, complex session IDs
- Utilize HTTP-only and Secure flags for cookies
- Set appropriate session timeouts and regenerate IDs after privilege changes
- Deploy multi-layered MFA with adaptive challenges based on risk
Hence, robust authentication requires not just strong password policies and MFA, but comprehensive session management and proper implementation of authentication protocols 33.
Server-side request forgery (SSRF) has emerged as one of the most dangerous website hacking methods, now ranking in the OWASP Top 10 due to its increased prevalence 34. This vulnerability enables attackers to manipulate servers into making unauthorized requests to internal or external resources, effectively bypassing typical security controls.
Image Source: www.invicti.com
SSRF in Cloud Environments
In cloud environments, SSRF primarily targets metadata services to steal credentials and access tokens 35. Attackers frequently exploit cloud provider metadata endpoints (http://169.254.169.254/) to access AWS IAM tokens with privileged roles 36. Moreover, Microsoft recently addressed SSRF vulnerabilities across four Azure services—Azure API Management, Azure Functions, Azure Machine Learning, and Azure Digital Twins 37. These attacks are particularly dangerous as they can provide initial access that leads to broader cloud infrastructure compromise.
Exploiting Internal Services
SSRF allows attackers to abuse trust relationships between servers and internal systems. Typically, they modify application URLs to target:
- Internal admin interfaces accessible without authentication 38
- Private database services with HTTP interfaces 9
- Docker daemon and container orchestration endpoints 10
- Local file systems via file:// URLs 39
Internal port scanning is another common exploitation technique, where response times and error messages reveal available services behind firewalls 38.
SSRF Filter Bypass Techniques
Attackers regularly circumvent SSRF protections through:
- Alternative IP representations (2130706433, 017700000001, or 127.1 for 127.0.0.1) 38
- DNS rebinding to dynamically change resolved addresses 40
- URL encoding or double-encoding to confuse parsers 38
- Domain names resolving to internal IPs (.nip.io domains) 41
- Redirection services that bypass URL validation 39
Preventing SSRF Attacks
Effective SSRF prevention requires multiple layers:
- Implement allowlists for permitted domains and URL schemas 34
- Segment remote resource functionality in separate networks 34
- Validate and sanitize all user inputs 39
- Enforce “deny by default” firewall policies 34
- Avoid sending raw responses to clients 9
- For cloud environments, migrate to IMDSv2 and disable IMDSv1 on AWS 35
Currently, SSRF detection tools can analyze trace patterns and automatically flag suspicious requests to metadata endpoints or internal services 42.
In 2023, the cybersecurity landscape witnessed a paradigm shift as artificial intelligence emerged as a formidable tool in website hacking. Security researchers now report that AI-powered attacks have increased by 51% since 2022 8, creating unprecedented challenges for website defenders.
LLM Prompt Injection Attacks
Prompt injection has become the #1 security vulnerability on the OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 5. This technique involves manipulating large language models with carefully crafted inputs that override their security guardrails. Hackers can force LLMs to leak sensitive system information, execute malicious code through APIs, or manipulate critical decision processes. Indeed, these attacks require minimal technical knowledge—attackers need only understand how to effectively command an LLM using natural language 5.
AI-Generated Phishing Campaigns
Traditionally, phishing emails were easily identifiable through grammatical errors and spelling mistakes. Presently, cybercriminals leverage generative AI to create highly convincing messages without these telltale signs 43. Simultaneously, AI enables voice cloning for vishing attacks and deepfake creation, with one reported case involving a $25 million fraudulent transfer approved by a banking employee who couldn’t detect the artificially generated voice of their CFO 44.
Automated Vulnerability Discovery
AI is revolutionizing how vulnerabilities are discovered in websites. Primarily, AI-enhanced fuzzing has already uncovered dozens of previously unknown bugs in open-source projects 45, including a 20-year-old flaw in OpenSSL discovered in 2023 45. Tools like Google’s Big Sleep and Code Intelligence’s Spark can autonomously identify security weaknesses, with Spark reportedly saving up to 1,000 hours of manual effort when testing a codebase with 100,000 lines 45.
Defending Against AI-Enhanced Threats
Notably, defending against AI-powered attacks requires multi-layered strategies:
- Implement AI-based threat detection systems that can identify anomalies in real-time 46
- For LLM systems, constrain model behavior through specific instructions and enforce strict output validation 8
- Deploy AI-enhanced deception campaigns that create dynamic, adaptive environments to mislead attackers 47
- Keep humans in the loop for high-risk actions, requiring manual verification before executing sensitive operations 5
Nevertheless, the most effective defense may be turning attackers’ own tools against them—using AI to enhance vulnerability detection before malicious actors can exploit them.
Web cache poisoning represents a growing threat where attackers manipulate caching systems to serve malicious content to multiple users. This attack vector differs from direct website hacking by targeting the infrastructure that improves site performance, potentially affecting thousands of visitors with a single attack.
Image Source: www.acunetix.com
Cache Deception Techniques
Cache deception exploits misconfigured servers by tricking them into storing sensitive, user-specific content in public caches. Typically, attackers manipulate URL paths, appending file extensions like .css or .js to pages containing sensitive information. For example, requesting https://example.com/my_profile/stylesheet.css might return the content of /my_profile but cache it as a static resource, making private data accessible to anyone.
Exploiting Caching Headers
Attackers manipulate HTTP headers to control how content is cached. By modifying unkeyed headers like X-Forwarded-Host, they can inject malicious content that gets stored in the cache. Fundamentally, this works because many caching systems don’t include certain headers in their cache keys, creating a gap between what the server processes and what determines the cache entry’s uniqueness.
Cache Key Manipulation
Cache key manipulation involves altering components that determine whether a response is cached. Common techniques include:
- Exploiting unkeyed query parameters
- Manipulating port numbers when not included in cache keys
- Abusing HTTP method inconsistencies when request methods aren’t part of the key
These attacks are particularly dangerous because a single poisoned cache can affect countless users until the cache expires.
Cache Security Best Practices
To protect your website against cache poisoning:
- Configure caches to respect application-set Cache-Control headers
- Cache resources based on Content-Type headers rather than file extensions alone
- Implement the Vary header correctly to specify which request components affect responses
- Return appropriate HTTP error codes for non-existent resources
- For sensitive content, use
Cache-Control: no-storedirective to prevent caching entirely
Early detection through regular security scanning remains essential, as web cache vulnerabilities often persist unnoticed until exploited.
Zero-day vulnerabilities represent the ultimate website security nightmare—flaws unknown to developers with zero days to prepare defenses. Throughout 2025, these undiscovered weaknesses have become increasingly valuable, with high-impact zero-day attacks causing losses ranging from $500,000 to $2 million per incident.
Image Source: www.imperva.com
Browser Engine Vulnerabilities
Browser engines remain prime targets for sophisticated attacks. Recently, Kaspersky discovered a critical zero-day vulnerability in Google Chrome (CVE-2025-2783) that allowed attackers to bypass the browser’s sandbox protection system through a carefully crafted phishing campaign. Once clicked, the link required no additional user interaction to compromise systems. Similarly, Apple addressed an “extremely sophisticated” WebKit engine vulnerability (CVE-2025-24201) that enabled attackers to escape the Web Content sandbox, potentially leading to unauthorized actions on targeted systems.
Web Server Zero-Days
Server-level zero-days often lead to widespread exploitation. Microsoft recently patched CVE-2025-29824, a vulnerability in the Windows Common Log File System (CLFS) kernel driver. Primarily, this flaw allowed attackers with standard user accounts to escalate privileges and deploy ransomware. Threat actors specifically value these post-compromise elevation of privilege exploits because they enable escalation from initial access into privileged system control.
CMS Zero-Day Threats
Content management systems face persistent zero-day threats. Currently, the Craft CMS vulnerability (CVE-2025-23209) is actively exploited in attacks despite having a relatively small market share. Furthermore, a-blog CMS users faced CVE-2025-31103, an “untrusted data deserialization vulnerability” allowing attackers to “store arbitrary files on the server” and execute arbitrary scripts, with attacks observed on multiple versions.
Reducing Zero-Day Exposure
Effectively, organizations can minimize zero-day risks through:
- Implementing browser isolation techniques that separate browsing activity from end-user devices
- Deploying behavior-based detection systems that identify anomalous activities
- Adopting zero trust security models that require continuous verification
- Maintaining comprehensive patch management processes
- Using threat intelligence to stay informed about emerging vulnerabilities
Ultimately, while zero-day vulnerabilities cannot be eliminated, these strategies can significantly reduce their potential impact on website security.
Broken access control flaws regularly top the OWASP security risk list, making them a critical website hacking method. These vulnerabilities occur when applications fail to properly verify whether users should be allowed to access specific resources or perform certain actions.
Image Source: www.imperva.com
Horizontal Privilege Escalation
Horizontal privilege escalation happens when attackers gain access to resources belonging to another user with similar privileges 48. For example, in a banking application using URLs like https://bank.com/account?user_id=1001, a malicious actor could simply change the ID to 1002 to view someone else’s account details 49. This attack typically targets insecure direct object references where user-controlled parameters directly access objects 50. Banking and healthcare sectors remain primary targets as they store valuable personal information accessible through predictable identifiers.
Vertical Privilege Escalation
Vertical privilege escalation occurs when attackers gain higher-level privileges than authorized, essentially moving from regular user to administrator status 51. Common techniques include exploiting misconfigured access controls, unpatched software vulnerabilities, and manipulating security tokens 51. In Linux environments, attackers may exploit SUDO misconfigurations to execute commands with root privileges 51. Fundamentally, these attacks enable complete system compromise and unrestricted data access.
IDOR Vulnerabilities
Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerabilities arise when applications use user-supplied input to access objects directly without proper verification 52. These flaws typically appear in URLs (/users/123), POST parameters, or hidden form fields containing direct database references 48. IDOR attacks have impacted major organizations—in 2021, a teenager discovered an IDOR vulnerability in Facebook’s Android app exposing page administrators’ identities 6, and in 2022, Vodafone reportedly exposed call records of 226 million customers through similar vulnerabilities 6.
Implementing Proper Access Controls
Effective access control implementation requires multiple layers:
- Enforce the principle of least privilege by restricting users to minimal access needed for their roles 53
- Implement regular access reviews to identify unused privileges and suspicious activities 54
- Utilize role-based access control (RBAC) combined with attribute-based controls for granular security 53
- Apply strict validation on all access attempts, verifying permissions server-side rather than client-side 48
- Maintain comprehensive audit logs to track all access events and changes to access control systems 54
Conclusion
Website security threats continue evolving at an unprecedented pace, with attackers developing sophisticated methods that challenge traditional defense mechanisms. These emerging threats demand robust, multi-layered security approaches tailored to specific vulnerabilities.
Protection against modern website attacks requires vigilant monitoring, regular security audits, and implementation of specific countermeasures for each threat vector. Organizations must prioritize security awareness, maintain updated systems, and adopt proactive defense strategies rather than reactive measures.
The financial impact of successful attacks extends beyond immediate losses, affecting brand reputation and customer trust. Security breaches cost companies an average of $4.35 million per incident, highlighting the critical need for comprehensive security measures.
Website security remains a continuous process rather than a one-time implementation. Organizations should regularly assess their security posture, stay informed about emerging threats, and adapt their defense strategies accordingly. Proactive security measures, combined with ongoing vigilance, provide the strongest defense against these evolving cyber threats.
References
[1] – https://medium.com/@raxomara/bypassing-rate-limits-all-known-techniques-25891bb5ca59
[2] – https://www.activestate.com/resources/quick-reads/dependency-confusion/
[3] – https://tyk.io/learning-center/api-rate-limiting/
[4] – https://curity.io/resources/learn/api-security-best-practices/
[5] – https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/prompt-injection
[6] – https://www.eccouncil.org/cybersecurity-exchange/web-application-hacking/idor-vulnerability-detection-prevention/
[7] – https://portswigger.net/web-security/cross-site-scripting
[8] – https://genai.owasp.org/llmrisk/llm01-prompt-injection/
[9] – https://brightsec.com/blog/ssrf-server-side-request-forgery/
[10] – https://medium.com/@okanyildiz1994/mastering-ssrf-vulnerabilities-an-ultra-extensive-guide-to-understanding-and-mitigating-43aa09a8df08
[11] – https://medium.com/@AhmedF/10-common-api-security-risks-you-need-to-know-about-in-2023-98e21785c542
[12] – https://www.cequence.ai/blog/api-security/api-security-need-to-know-top-5-authentication-pitfalls/
[13] – https://www.imperva.com/blog/graphql-vulnerabilities-common-attacks/
[14] – https://brightsec.com/blog/top-api-vulnerabilities-and-6-ways-to-mitigate-them/
[15] – https://testfully.io/blog/api-rate-limit/
[16] – https://tyk.io/blog/graphql-security-7-common-vulnerabilities-and-how-to-mitigate-the-risks/
[17] – https://www.stackhawk.com/blog/defending-against-api-attacks-strategies-for-protecting-your-apis-and-data/
[18] – https://scribesecurity.com/software-supply-chain-security/supply-chain-risks/
[19] – https://www.darkreading.com/application-security/third-party-scripts-websites-broad-open-attack-vector
[20] – https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/222847/what-practical-damage-a-compromised-malicious-third-party-javascript-can-cause
[21] – https://orca.security/resources/blog/dependency-confusion-supply-chain-attacks/
[22] – https://security.snyk.io/package/npm/npm
[23] – https://onenine.com/best-practices-for-securing-third-party-dependencies/
[24] – https://docs.npmjs.com/auditing-package-dependencies-for-security-vulnerabilities/
[25] – https://fossa.com/blog/dependency-confusion-understanding-preventing-attacks/
[26] – https://www.contrastsecurity.com/glossary/authentication-bypass-vulnerability
[27] – https://www.vaadata.com/blog/understanding-oauth-2-0-and-its-common-vulnerabilities/
[28] – https://www.coupa.com/blog/how-to-mitigate-oauth2-vulnerabilities/
[29] – https://www.darkreading.com/endpoint-security/top-5-techniques-attackers-use-to-bypass-mfa
[30] – https://www.descope.com/learn/post/mfa-bypass
[31] – https://www.menlosecurity.com/blog/the-art-of-mfa-bypass-how-attackers-regularly-beat-two-factor-authentication
[32] – https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Session_Management_Cheat_Sheet.html
[33] – https://www.netwize.com/7-best-practices-for-implementing-a-robust-identity-and-access-management-strategy/
[34] – https://owasp.org/Top10/A10_2021-Server-Side_Request_Forgery_%28SSRF%29/
[35] – https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Server_Side_Request_Forgery_Prevention_Cheat_Sheet.html
[36] – https://orca.security/resources/blog/ssrf-vulnerabilities-in-four-azure-services/
[37] – https://msrc.microsoft.com/blog/2023/01/microsoft-resolves-four-ssrf-vulnerabilities-in-azure-cloud-services/
[38] – https://portswigger.net/web-security/ssrf
[39] – https://www.leviathansecurity.com/blog/bypassing-ssrf-filters-using-r3dir
[40] – https://blog.cyberadvisors.com/technical-blog/blog/using-dns-to-bypass-ssrf-protections
[41] – https://www.vaadata.com/blog/exploiting-the-ssrf-vulnerability/
[42] – https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/detect-ssrf-attacks/
[43] – https://www.keepersecurity.com/blog/2024/09/13/how-ai-is-making-phishing-attacks-more-dangerous/
[44] – https://www.reveal.security/resources/defending-against-ai-driven-cyber-threats/
[45] – https://www.scworld.com/feature/how-ai-can-revolutionize-vulnerability-research
[46] – https://www.securityinfowatch.com/cybersecurity/article/55281404/ai-driven-sophisticated-cyber-attacks-techniques-detection-and-defense
[47] – https://www.countercraftsec.com/blog/ai-enhanced-cybersecurity-threats-defense-strategies/
[48] – https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Insecure_Direct_Object_Reference_Prevention_Cheat_Sheet.html
[49] – https://bluegoatcyber.com/blog/web-application-horizontal-and-vertical-privilege-escalation-in-penetration-testing/
[50] – https://portswigger.net/web-security/access-control
[51] – https://www.aptive.co.uk/blog/what-is-vertical-privilege-escalation/
[52] – https://portswigger.net/web-security/access-control/idor
[53] – https://pathlock.com/learn/user-access-controls-11-best-practices-for-businesses/
[54] – https://www.avigilon.com/blog/access-control-cybersecurity