Shieldome SiegeShieldome Siege
Technique

API Security Testing: REST and GraphQL

An API rarely shows its mistakes the way a broken web page does. There is no visual glitch to notice, just a response body that quietly returns more, or less, than it should. That makes API testing less forgiving of a shallow pass than a traditional web application review.

REST-specific issues worth checking

GraphQL adds its own surface

GraphQL's flexibility is exactly what makes it worth testing differently from REST:

A useful habit: test authorization by changing identifiers, not just by removing credentials entirely. Missing authentication is usually caught quickly. Broken authorization between two authenticated users is what actually slips through.

Enumeration still applies

The same enumeration discipline that applies to network targets applies to API surface area too: finding every version of an API (v1 alongside v2, a deprecated endpoint nobody removed), every environment (staging endpoints reachable from the public internet), and every undocumented route that never made it into the official API reference. Our piece on network enumeration covers the same principle at the infrastructure layer.

Findings still map back to familiar categories

Most API findings still map cleanly onto the OWASP Top 10 categories, broken access control and injection especially show up constantly in API testing. The delivery mechanism is different. The underlying weakness usually is not.

See it in an actual tool

Shieldome Siege enforces scope on every action and gates exploit confirmation behind a human approval, with a tamper-evident audit log of the whole engagement.

Read the documentation