Unexpected results when manually calling getInteractshService.deregister()
See original GitHub issueDescribe the bug
When manually calling the function Java.type("org.parosproxy.paros.control.Control").getSingleton().getExtensionLoader().getExtension("ExtensionOast").getInteractshService().deregister()
I would expect the OAST canaries defined to be reset to allow for a new one to be used, it would appear the code ends early on InteractshService.java#278 if the code returned is not 200.
Steps to reproduce the behavior
- Start a interactsh OOB server
- Let the client sit for a few days until the interactsh server loses the correlation-id
- Call Java.type(“org.parosproxy.paros.control.Control”).getSingleton().getExtensionLoader().getExtension(“ExtensionOast”).getInteractshService().deregister()
Expected behavior
I would expect the de register option to clear the current server payload listed regardless of the returned code from the OAST service.
Software versions
2.11.1
Screenshots
No response
Errors from the zap.log file
[ZAP-ScriptExecutor-Deregiser OAST.js] WARN InteractshService - Error during interactsh deregister, due to bad HTTP code 400. Content: {“error”:“could not remove id: could not get correlation-id from cache”}
Additional context
No response
Would you like to help fix this issue?
- Yes
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created a year ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:12 (11 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Is calling destructor manually always a sign of bad design?
Calling the destructor manually is required if the object was constructed using an overloaded form of operator new() , except when using the ......
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
@njmulsqb Thank you for the quick bug fix!
That’d be great but it’s a bigger issue 😉