business-logic（业务逻辑）

Business Logic Security (BIZ)

Analyze application business logic for security vulnerabilities including workflow step bypassing, negative amount manipulation, coupon/discount abuse, self-referral exploitation, state machine manipulation, and time-based logic exploits. Business logic flaws are unique to each application and cannot be detected by generic scanners -- they require understanding the intended workflow and finding ways to subvert it.

Supported Flags

Read ../../shared/schemas/flags.md for the full flag specification. This skill supports all cross-cutting flags. Key flags for this skill:

• --scope determines which files to analyze (default: changed)
• --depth standard reads code and checks business rule implementations
• --depth deep traces full workflows from initiation through completion
• --severity filters output (business logic issues are often high or critical)

Framework Context

Key CWEs in scope:

• CWE-840: Business Logic Errors
• CWE-841: Improper Enforcement of Behavioral Workflow
• CWE-799: Improper Control of Interaction Frequency
• CWE-837: Improper Enforcement of a Single, Unique Action
• CWE-20: Improper Input Validation

Detection Patterns

Read references/detection-patterns.md for the full catalog of code patterns, search heuristics, language-specific examples, and false positive guidance.

Workflow

1. Determine Scope

Parse flags and resolve the file list per ../../shared/schemas/flags.md. Filter to files likely to contain business logic:

• Payment and checkout (**/payments/**, **/checkout/**, **/billing/**)
• Order processing (**/orders/**, **/cart/**, **/transactions/**)
• Discount and coupon logic (**/coupons/**, **/discounts/**, **/promotions/**)
• Referral and reward systems (**/referrals/**, **/rewards/**, **/loyalty/**)
• Workflow and state machines (**/workflows/**, **/state/**, **/status/**)
• User account operations (**/accounts/**, **/profiles/**)

2. Check for Available Scanners

Detect scanners per ../../shared/schemas/scanners.md:

1. semgrep -- custom rules can catch some business logic patterns

Record which scanners are available. Business logic flaws are primarily detected through manual code analysis, not automated scanners.

3. Run Scanners (If Available)

If semgrep is available, run with rules targeting business logic:

semgrep scan --config auto --json --quiet <target>

Filter for rules matching validation, state management, and numeric handling patterns. Normalize output to the findings schema.

4. Claude Code Analysis

This is the primary detection method for business logic flaws:

1. Workflow step bypass: Map multi-step workflows (checkout, verification, approval) and verify each step cannot be skipped by calling later steps directly.
2. Negative amount manipulation: Find numeric inputs (amounts, quantities, prices) and verify the application rejects negative values.
3. Coupon/discount abuse: Find discount application logic and verify coupons cannot be applied multiple times, stacked beyond limits, or used after expiration.
4. Self-referral exploitation: Find referral systems and verify users cannot refer themselves or create circular referral chains.
5. State machine integrity: Map state transitions and verify invalid transitions are rejected (e.g., "shipped" cannot go back to "pending").
6. Time-based logic: Find logic depending on timestamps and verify it handles timezone manipulation, clock skew, and deadline race conditions.

When --depth deep, additionally trace:

• Full workflow paths from start to completion
• All possible state transitions and their guards
• Cross-endpoint workflow manipulation scenarios

5. Report Findings

Format output per ../../shared/schemas/findings.md using the BIZ prefix (e.g., BIZ-001, BIZ-002).

Include for each finding:

• Severity and confidence
• Exact file location with code snippet
• Step-by-step exploit scenario
• Business impact (financial loss, unfair advantage)
• Concrete fix with diff when possible
• CWE references

What to Look For

These are the high-signal patterns specific to business logic security. Each maps to a detection pattern in references/detection-patterns.md.

1. Workflow step bypass -- Multi-step processes where a later step can be invoked directly without completing prior steps.
2. Negative amount manipulation -- Numeric inputs accepted without sign validation, allowing negative amounts to reverse charges or increase balances.
3. Coupon/discount abuse -- Discount codes applied multiple times, stacked beyond intended limits, or used on ineligible items.
4. Self-referral exploitation -- Referral reward systems that do not prevent users from referring themselves or creating fake referral chains.
5. State machine manipulation -- Invalid state transitions accepted by the system (e.g., marking an order as "delivered" before "shipped").
6. Time-based logic exploits -- Logic dependent on client-supplied timestamps, exploitable timezone handling, or deadline race conditions.
7. Price manipulation -- Client-supplied prices accepted without server-side verification against the product catalog.
8. Quantity abuse -- No limits on quantities enabling abuse (ordering negative quantities, exceeding stock, zero-quantity orders).

Scanner Integration

Fallback (no scanner): Business logic flaws require manual code analysis. Use Grep with patterns from references/detection-patterns.md to find financial operations, state transitions, discount logic, and referral systems. Report findings with confidence: medium.

Output Format

Use the findings schema from ../../shared/schemas/findings.md.

• ID prefix: BIZ (e.g., BIZ-001)
• metadata.tool: business-logic
• metadata.framework: specialized
• metadata.category: BIZ
• references.cwe: CWE-840, CWE-841
• references.owasp: A04:2021 (Insecure Design)
• references.stride: T (Tampering) or E (Elevation of Privilege)

Severity guidance for this category:

• critical: Direct financial loss (negative amounts in payments, price manipulation)
• high: Workflow bypass on security-critical processes, unlimited discount stacking
• medium: Self-referral abuse, state manipulation with limited business impact
• low: Minor workflow inconsistencies, cosmetic state issues