-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Montoya API - missing audit issues #9
Comments
Thanks for reporting this! We're currently looking into this, but would it be possible for you to drop us an email at [email protected] with the code that triggers this issue? |
@Hannah-PortSwigger @SeanBurnsUK is a fix coming for this? (and if so - when) I noticed the same in my own code. specifically -> a registered AuditIssueHandler does not seem to be called even if issues are found |
Hi @petrabrunner |
@Hannah-PortSwigger you mean the latest early adopter version of burp suite (which version should I be using) or a specific new version of the montoya-api? |
Sorry, I meant the latest early adopter version of Burp - currently v2023.1.1 |
can confirm - I am using that version of burp suite - and yes - I will send an example your way. thx |
Hi!
I've just started experimenting with the new API and ran into some issues I didn't expect. I've successfully launched a scan which works just fine according to what I see in the GUI. Unfortunately,
Audit#issues
is always empty, even if I can see in the GUI that some issues were found. Also,AuditIssueHandler#handleNewAuditIssue
is never called, even though there are issues in the GUI and I have registered this handler.When I call
api.siteMap().issues()
, I get all the issues I can see in the GUI, but now,AuditIssue#requestResponses
is always empty, although I can see requests and responses in the GUI.According to the JavaDocs, I would expect neither
Audit#issues
norAuditIssue#requestResponses
to be empty. Am I missing something?I've tried Burp Suite Professional 2022.9.5 and 2022.11, the problem exists in both versions. But I don't know the old API well, so I'm not sure if this is a bug or just a misunderstanding on my part.
Any help would be appreciated!
Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: