Generate OWASP Top 10 Test Scenarios with AI
For each OWASP Top 10 (2025) category (A01-A10), returns 3-5 concrete test cases with payloads, recommended tools, expected secure behavior, and remediation guidance tailored to the target application.
When to use it
- You're running a manual security review and need the canonical test set.
- You're scoping a pen test and want to align with OWASP framing.
- You're training junior engineers in security testing fundamentals.
- You're documenting vulnerability coverage for compliance review.
The prompt
XML-tagged — best for Claude 4.x
<role>
You are a penetration tester who has worked across web, API, and mobile targets. You cite the OWASP Top 10 (2025) framework and produce CONCRETE payloads, not generic descriptions like "try SQL injection".
</role>
<context>
OWASP Top 10 (2025) categories:
- A01: Broken Access Control
- A02: Cryptographic Failures
- A03: Injection
- A04: Insecure Design
- A05: Security Misconfiguration
- A06: Vulnerable and Outdated Components
- A07: Identification and Authentication Failures
- A08: Software and Data Integrity Failures
- A09: Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
- A10: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
</context>
<task>
For each OWASP Top 10 category, produce:
1. A 1-sentence description of the category in YOUR APP'S context
2. 3-5 test scenarios with: title, concrete payloads or steps, expected SECURE behavior
3. Recommended tools (ZAP, Burp, semgrep, custom scripts) per scenario
4. Remediation guidance (1-2 bullets specific to the category, not generic)
</task>
<input>
Application type: {app_type}
Tech stack: {stack}
Authentication scheme: {auth}
</input>
<constraints>
- Cite OWASP 2025 framework.
- Payloads must be CONCRETE strings, not "try SQL injection".
- Each category gets a tailored description for the input app, not generic boilerplate.
- Recommended tools are actionable (named tool + flag/feature if relevant).
- Remediation maps to the category's nature, not "fix the code".
</constraints>
<output_format>
Markdown document with H2 per category (A01–A10), each containing: 1-line description, table (Scenario | Payload / Steps | Expected secure behavior | Tool), then 1-2 remediation bullets.
</output_format>
Before writing, identify which 2-3 categories are most acute for THIS app and frontload them in the document.Example
Common pitfalls
- Model uses 2021 OWASP Top 10 by default; force 2025 citation.
- Generic remediation ('use parameterized queries' for every category) — force category-specific guidance.
- Concrete payloads degrade into 'try SQL injection' descriptions — re-prompt with explicit string examples.
- Multi-tenant SaaS specifics get glossed; A01 scenarios always relate to single-user IDOR.
Tips
- Re-run when OWASP publishes a new Top 10; 2021 → 2025 added new categories (A10 SSRF).
- Pair with `security-test-checklist` — Top 10 covers attack patterns; ASVS covers control coverage.
- Run the concrete payloads in your staging env in a recorded session (Burp project) — replayable evidence.
- Mark scenarios that need a real pen tester (e.g., chained exploits) vs ones that can be automated in DAST.
FAQ
Every 3-4 years. The 2025 list reordered categories and added new SSRF coverage based on bug-bounty data trends. Re-baseline annually even when the framework doesn't change — your app's threat landscape evolves.
Related prompts
Generate Security Test Checklist (OWASP ASVS)
Returns an OWASP ASVS-aligned security testing checklist covering authentication, session management, authorization, input validation, output encoding, cryptography, API security, file upload, and HTTP security headers — each item with a test method (manual / DAST / SAST) and ASVS chapter citation.
Open →Generate Authentication Bypass Test Cases
Returns a structured suite of authentication and authorization bypass test cases — IDOR, JWT algorithm confusion, session fixation, MFA bypass, brute-force resistance, broken object-level authz — with payloads, CWE numbers, and the detection signal that confirms vulnerability vs secure behavior.
Open →Generate API Rate Limiting Test Scenarios
Returns rate-limiting test cases verifying X-RateLimit-* headers, behavior at the limit boundary, burst handling, reset window semantics, per-authentication-level limits, and concurrent request behavior across multiple workers.
Open →SBOM-Based Dependency Vulnerability Tests
Reads an SBOM (CycloneDX or SPDX) and returns test cases for known-vulnerability presence (CVE lookup against KEV catalog), license compliance (allow/deny list), transitive dependency drift, and prioritized update list based on exploitability and reach.
Open →