Location Research Breakthrough Possible @S-Logix pro@slogix.in

Qwen3 LLM-Based SQL Injection Attack Scenario Generation Against OWASP Juice Shop with ModSecurity WAF-Based Detection, Blocking, and Security Logging

Description

Web applications process user input to authenticate users, retrieve records, and perform application functions. If input is handled insecurely, specially crafted input may interfere with database queries and create a SQL Injection (SQLi) risk.

In this use case, OWASP Juice Shop is deployed as the intentionally vulnerable target application in an isolated laboratory using Ubuntu Linux and VirtualBox. The Qwen3 Large Language Model (LLM) is used to generate controlled SQL Injection test scenarios, with common SQL Injection samples from a publicly available dataset used as reference examples.

The dataset is used as reference material for scenario generation. The dataset name is not specified in this document, and this use case does not assume that Qwen3 is retrained or fine-tuned on the dataset.

The generated scenarios are reviewed and validated before being submitted to the local application. ModSecurity is configured as a Web Application Firewall (WAF) in front of OWASP Juice Shop, with the OWASP Core Rule Set (CRS) enabled to inspect incoming HTTP requests.

The WAF evaluates requests against its configured rules. Requests matching applicable blocking rules are denied, and relevant security events are recorded in the ModSecurity audit logs.

Kali Linux is used as the security-testing environment. Python is used to organize test scenarios, submit controlled HTTP requests, collect responses, and support result analysis. The test results are correlated with WAF audit logs to assess detection and blocking effectiveness.

The WAF configuration is reviewed to ensure that the protected application is reached through the WAF and that the intended rules and blocking mode are active.

After testing, the generated scenarios, HTTP responses, WAF rule events, and any false positives or inconclusive results are documented. The final assessment distinguishes between a request being blocked, a request being allowed, and a confirmed application-level vulnerability.

The complete security-validation workflow is:
Publicly Available Dataset
→
Common SQL Injection Samples
→
Qwen3 LLM
→
Test Scenario Generation
→
Scenario Validation
→
Kali Linux Security Testing
→
OWASP Juice Shop
→
ModSecurity WAF Inspection
→
Detection and Blocking
→
Audit Log Collection
→
Result Correlation
→
Security Effectiveness Evaluation

Existing Security Problem

Application/Service: OWASP Juice Shop

OWASP Juice Shop is the target web application used for controlled SQL Injection security testing in this use case.

It provides an intentionally vulnerable environment in which application requests and defensive controls can be evaluated without targeting production systems.

Existing Problem :

SQL Injection can occur when an application handles user-controlled input in a way that allows the input to interfere with database query structure.

Security testing based only on a small collection of predefined requests may not provide sufficient coverage of the input variations that a web application firewall may encounter.

A WAF may detect common SQL Injection patterns, but its effectiveness depends on the request content, active rules, configuration, and how traffic is routed to the application.

AI-generated test scenarios also introduce their own limitations: a generated request may be malformed, irrelevant to the application's endpoints, or fail to exercise a vulnerable code path. Therefore, generated scenarios must be validated and their results must be interpreted using HTTP responses and security logs.

The security problem is:
OWASP Juice Shop
→
User-Controlled Input
→
Potential SQL Injection
→
Incoming HTTP Request
→
WAF Rule Evaluation
→
Request Allowed or Blocked
→
Potential Application Exposure
→
Detection and Coverage Uncertainty
→
Security Risk

The proposed solution introduces reference-dataset preparation, LLM-based test-scenario generation, scenario validation, controlled request execution, WAF rule enforcement, security-log correlation, and post-test effectiveness evaluation.

Attack

Specific Attack: SQL Injection (SQLi)

The controlled attack scenario evaluates how ModSecurity with the OWASP Core Rule Set handles SQL Injection test requests generated with assistance from the Qwen3 LLM.

Common SQL Injection samples from a publicly available dataset are used as reference examples. Qwen3 is prompted to produce additional test scenarios for the authorized laboratory application. The generated output is validated before execution.

Kali Linux provides the security-testing environment for submitting and inspecting authorized test requests. The objective is to evaluate whether the configured WAF detects and blocks applicable test requests and whether the request and rule evidence can be found in the security logs.

This assessment does not assume that every generated request is a working exploit or that every request allowed by the WAF proves a vulnerability.

Attack Behavior :
Reference SQL Injection Samples
→
Qwen3 LLM Scenario Generation
→
Generated Test Scenario
→
Request Validation
→
Kali Linux Security Testing
→
Controlled HTTP Request
→
ModSecurity WAF Inspection
→
OWASP CRS Rule Evaluation
→
Request Allowed or Blocked
→
Audit Log and Response Collection
→
Security Effectiveness Assessment

Security Concept

LLM-Assisted Attack Scenario Generation and WAF Control Validation

The primary security concept is the use of an LLM to assist with test-scenario generation and the use of a WAF to inspect requests before they reach a web application.

The objective is not simply to generate SQL Injection strings. The workflow checks whether generated scenarios are valid for the controlled test, submits them through the configured WAF, and evaluates the observed response together with security-log evidence.

Qwen3 supports the test-generation stage. ModSecurity and the OWASP Core Rule Set provide the defensive inspection and blocking stage. Python supports controlled execution and result collection, while Kali Linux provides the security-testing environment.

The assessment follows:
Reference Sample Review
→
Qwen3 Scenario Generation
→
Scenario Validation
→
Kali Linux Security Testing
→
Controlled Request Execution
→
ModSecurity Inspection
→
OWASP CRS Rule Evaluation
→
Allow/Block Decision
→
HTTP Response Collection
→
Audit Log Correlation
→
Detection and Blocking Evaluation
→
Findings and Recommendations

Defensive Mechanism

The security concept defines the overall testing strategy. The following are the specific defensive mechanisms implemented.

Web Application Firewall Inspection :

ModSecurity is placed in front of OWASP Juice Shop and inspects incoming HTTP requests.

Purpose: Evaluate incoming requests against configured web-attack detection rules.

OWASP Core Rule Set Enforcement

The OWASP CRS is enabled and configured with applicable SQL Injection detection rules.

Purpose
  • Identify common SQL Injection patterns covered by the active ruleset.

Request Blocking

ModSecurity is configured to block requests when an applicable rule triggers a blocking action.

Purpose
  • Prevent requests identified by the configured rules from reaching the protected application.

Protected Request Routing

Requests for the test application are routed through the WAF-protected endpoint rather than directly to the application.

Purpose
  • Ensure the assessment actually exercises the configured defensive control.

LLM Output Validation

Qwen3-generated scenarios are reviewed for request format, relevance, and suitability before testing.

Purpose
  • Exclude malformed or irrelevant generated scenarios from the evaluation.

Controlled Test Execution

Test requests are sent only to the locally deployed OWASP Juice Shop instance in the authorized laboratory.

Purpose
  • Keep attack simulation within a safe, controlled environment.

Audit Logging

ModSecurity audit logging is enabled to record relevant rule matches and WAF actions.

Purpose
  • Preserve evidence for investigation and result verification.

HTTP Response Correlation

Each test request is associated with its HTTP response and corresponding WAF log entry where available.

Purpose
  • Distinguish blocked requests, allowed requests, and inconclusive outcomes.

False-Positive Review

Benign baseline requests are tested and compared with WAF decisions.

Purpose
  • Identify legitimate requests that may be incorrectly blocked.

Post-Test Configuration Review

The WAF routing, active rules, and blocking mode are checked after the experiment.

Purpose
  • Confirm that the reported results correspond to the intended defensive configuration.

Security Tools

Primary AI Scenario-Generation Model: Qwen3 LLM

Qwen3 is used to generate SQL Injection test scenarios from common reference examples.

Purpose
  • Generate candidate SQL Injection test scenarios.
  • Produce variations for controlled security testing.
  • Support repeatable test-case preparation.
  • Avoid assuming that generated requests are automatically valid or exploitable.

Local LLM Runtime: Ollama

Ollama can run a compatible Qwen3 model locally on Ubuntu, subject to model size and available system resources.

Purpose
  • Load and run the selected Qwen3 model.
  • Provide a local interface for prompts and generated output.
  • Support model execution without requiring a hosted LLM service.

Target Web Application: OWASP Juice Shop

OWASP Juice Shop provides the intentionally vulnerable application used in the controlled test.

Purpose
  • Provide the target HTTP application.
  • Support controlled SQL Injection security testing.
  • Allow observation of application responses.
  • Keep the assessment within a laboratory environment.

Security Testing Environment: Kali Linux

Kali Linux provides the security-testing environment used to assess OWASP Juice Shop and inspect application traffic.

Purpose
  • Run authorized web application security tests.
  • Provide access to SQL Injection and HTTP inspection tools.
  • Support test execution and evidence collection.

HTTP Test Automation Tool: Python

Python is used to organize generated test cases, submit requests, collect responses, and analyze results.

Purpose
  • Prepare and validate test-case input.
  • Submit controlled HTTP requests.
  • Record HTTP status codes and relevant response details.
  • Correlate test results with WAF logs.

HTTP Request Library: Python Requests

Python Requests provides HTTP client functionality for the test harness.

Purpose
  • Send requests to the local WAF-protected endpoint.
  • Collect HTTP responses.
  • Support repeatable execution of validated test cases.

SQL Injection Testing Tool: SQLmap

SQLmap is an open-source penetration-testing tool used to assess SQL Injection vulnerabilities in authorized applications.

Purpose
  • Assess designated application inputs for SQL Injection.
  • Observe application behavior during authorized testing.
  • Compare testing observations with WAF detection records.

Web Application Testing Tool: OWASP ZAP

OWASP ZAP is an open-source web application security testing proxy used to inspect HTTP requests and responses.

Purpose
  • Inspect HTTP requests and responses.
  • Review application behavior during testing.
  • Support verification of test scenarios.

Primary Defensive Tool: ModSecurity

ModSecurity is the open-source WAF engine that inspects requests before they reach the target application.

Purpose
  • Inspect incoming HTTP requests.
  • Apply configured security rules.
  • Block requests when applicable rules trigger blocking actions.
  • Record relevant security events.

Web Attack Detection Rules: OWASP Core Rule Set (CRS)

OWASP CRS provides general-purpose web attack detection rules, including rules intended to identify common SQL Injection patterns.

Purpose
  • Evaluate requests against applicable SQL Injection rules.
  • Support consistent WAF rule enforcement.
  • Provide rule identifiers and evidence for log analysis.

Security Event Evidence: ModSecurity Audit Logs

ModSecurity audit logs provide evidence of relevant requests, rule matches, and WAF actions, depending on the logging configuration.

Purpose
  • Review triggered rule information.
  • Correlate requests with WAF actions.
  • Support investigation of allowed and blocked requests.
  • Preserve evidence for the final report.

Deployment Tool: Docker

Docker can be used to deploy the target application and compatible supporting components in an isolated environment.

Purpose
  • Run the target application in a controlled environment.
  • Support reproducible deployment.
  • Help isolate the test environment from production systems.
  • Public Reference Dataset
  • A publicly available dataset containing common SQL Injection attack samples is used as reference material. The dataset name is intentionally not specified in this document.
  • Purpose :
  • Provide reference examples for scenario-generation prompts.
  • Help define the type of test cases being studied.
  • Support repeatable preparation of test inputs.

Target Platform: Ubuntu Linux

Ubuntu provides the host or virtual-machine environment for the application, model runtime, and testing components.

Purpose
  • Run the local LLM runtime and Python test harness.
  • Host the isolated test application and supporting services as configured.
  • Store test results and security evidence.

Virtualization and Isolation Platform: VirtualBox

VirtualBox can be used to isolate the Ubuntu laboratory from other systems and host the Kali Linux security-testing environment.

Purpose
  • Host the test environment in virtual machines.
  • Support controlled network configuration.
  • Reduce the chance of unintended interaction with production systems.

Process

STEP 01

Prepare the Isolated AI Security Testing Environment

  • Prepare an authorized Ubuntu-based laboratory for the experiment.
  • Verify available memory, storage, and CPU resources.
  • Decide whether the application and WAF will run directly on Ubuntu or in compatible containers.
  • Configure laboratory networking so that test requests remain within the intended environment.
  • Prepare Kali Linux as the security-testing environment and verify connectivity to the intended laboratory endpoint.
  • Keep the target application isolated from production systems.
  • Create a working directory for reference samples, generated scenarios, responses, and logs.
  • Record the initial environment and software versions.
Tools: Ubuntu Linux + Kali Linux + VirtualBox + Docker
STEP 02

Set Up the Qwen3 LLM Runtime

  • Install or prepare a compatible Ollama runtime on Ubuntu.
  • Select a Qwen3 model variant that fits the available system resources.
  • Download the model and verify that it loads successfully.
  • Run a basic prompt to confirm that the model returns output.
  • Record the model identifier and runtime configuration
  • Confirm that the model can be accessed by the local test workflow.
Tools: Ollama + Qwen3 + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 03

Prepare the Public Reference Dataset

  • Obtain a publicly available dataset containing common SQL Injection attack samples.
  • Review the dataset format and available fields.
  • Identify samples relevant to SQL Injection test-scenario generation.
  • Exclude unrelated, malformed, or unsuitable entries.
  • Retain only the reference examples needed for the controlled experiment.
  • Do not include sensitive data or real credentials.
  • Record the dataset preparation method without naming the dataset in the final document.
Tools: Public Reference Dataset + Python + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 04

Prepare the LLM Scenario-Generation Prompt

  • Define the target as the local OWASP Juice Shop laboratory application.
  • Explain that the task is authorized security testing in an isolated environment.
  • Provide selected common SQL Injection samples as reference examples.
  • Ask Qwen3 to produce clearly labelled candidate test scenarios in a consistent format.
  • Require the model to avoid unrelated content and to identify the intended test case.
  • Store the prompt template so the experiment can be repeated.
  • Do not treat model output as valid until it has been reviewed.
Tools: Qwen3 + Ollama + Python
STEP 05

Generate Candidate SQL Injection Test Scenarios

  • Submit the prepared prompt and reference examples to Qwen3.
  • Collect the generated candidate scenarios.
  • Store the raw model output separately from validated test cases.
  • Remove duplicate outputs where appropriate.
  • Identify outputs that are incomplete or unrelated to the requested test.
  • Record the generation settings and the number of candidates produced.
  • Preserve the generated candidates for later review.
Tools: Qwen3 + Ollama + Python
STEP 06

Validate and Prepare the Test Cases

  • Review each generated scenario for basic syntax and request-format suitability.
  • Check whether the scenario can be represented as an HTTP request to the local test application.
  • Exclude malformed requests and irrelevant model output.
  • Label each retained case for result tracking.
  • Keep a separate set of benign baseline requests for false-positive evaluation.
  • Do not assume that a generated case will exploit the application.
  • Store the validated test cases in a structured file
Tools: Python + OWASP Juice Shop
STEP 07

Deploy OWASP Juice Shop

  • Deploy OWASP Juice Shop in the isolated laboratory.
  • Confirm that the application starts successfully.
  • Identify the local application endpoint and port.
  • Verify that the application can be reached from the authorized test environment.
  • Confirm that no production or public target is involved.
  • Record the initial application status.
  • Keep the application available for the subsequent WAF configuration.
Tools: OWASP Juice Shop + Docker (if compatible) + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 08

Deploy ModSecurity in Front of the Application

  • Prepare a compatible web-server or reverse-proxy configuration with ModSecurity support.
  • Place the WAF in front of the OWASP Juice Shop endpoint.
  • Configure request forwarding to the local application.
  • Ensure the application is accessed through the WAF-protected endpoint.
  • Prevent the test workflow from bypassing the WAF by using the direct application endpoint.
  • Verify that ordinary requests pass through the proxy.
  • Record the protected endpoint and relevant configuration.
Tools: ModSecurity + Reverse Proxy + OWASP Juice Shop + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 09

Configure the OWASP Core Rule Set

  • Install or enable a compatible OWASP Core Rule Set version.
  • Confirm that the ruleset loads without configuration errors.
  • Enable the applicable request-inspection rules.
  • Review the configured SQL Injection detection coverage.
  • Confirm that the intended rule engine is active.
  • Record the ruleset version and relevant configuration.
  • Do not claim a rule is enabled until its active state has been verified.
Tools: OWASP CRS + ModSecurity + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 10

Enable Blocking and Audit Logging

  • Configure ModSecurity to enforce applicable blocking actions.
  • Enable the required audit logging for the test.
  • Confirm that the WAF records relevant rule matches and request actions.
  • Verify that audit logs are written to the expected location.
  • Send a benign request to confirm that the protected route works.
  • Check that the application remains accessible through the WAF.
  • Record the final WAF configuration before attack testing.
Tools: ModSecurity + OWASP CRS + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 11

Establish the Benign Request Baseline

  • Prepare ordinary requests that exercise normal application access.
  • Submit the benign requests through the protected endpoint.
  • Record HTTP status codes and relevant response details.
  • Review WAF logs for unexpected rule matches.
  • Identify whether legitimate requests are being blocked.
  • Save the baseline results for comparison with attack-test results.
  • Resolve obvious routing or configuration errors before proceeding.
Tools: Python Requests + ModSecurity + OWASP Juice Shop
STEP 12

Execute the Validated AI-Generated Test Scenarios

  • Load the validated scenario list into the Python test harness.
  • Use Kali Linux for authorized security testing and submit each test request only to the local WAF-protected application.
  • Use a controlled request rate to avoid disrupting the laboratory.
  • Record the identifier of each submitted scenario.
  • Capture the HTTP response and relevant response metadata.
  • Avoid submitting unreviewed model output directly.
  • Stop the test if the application or laboratory becomes unstable.
Tools: Kali Linux + Python + Python Requests + SQLmap + OWASP ZAP + Qwen3-generated test cases + OWASP Juice Shop
STEP 13

Collect WAF Decisions and Security Logs

  • Review the ModSecurity audit logs generated during the test.
  • Identify entries associated with the submitted test requests.
  • Record relevant rule identifiers and available action details.
  • Determine whether each request was blocked, allowed, or could not be correlated.
  • Preserve the evidence required for result analysis.
  • Protect the logs from accidental modification during the assessment.
  • Note any missing or incomplete logging information.
Tools: ModSecurity Audit Logs + OWASP CRS + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 14

Correlate Test Cases with HTTP Responses

  • Match each test-case identifier with its HTTP response.
  • Match the request with the corresponding WAF log entry where available.
  • Distinguish WAF blocking from application-generated error responses.
  • Identify cases where the available evidence is insufficient to determine the outcome.
  • Compare attack-test results with the benign baseline.
  • Store the correlated results in a structured report.
  • Avoid describing an allowed request as a confirmed vulnerability without further validation.
Tools: Python + Python Requests + ModSecurity Audit Logs
STEP 15

Evaluate Detection, Blocking, and False Positives

  • Count the validated SQL Injection test cases submitted.
  • Count the cases with evidence of WAF blocking.
  • Calculate the observed blocking proportion for the tested cases.
  • Review allowed cases to determine whether they were relevant and correctly formatted.
  • Review benign requests for unintended blocking.
  • Separate confirmed observations from inconclusive results.
  • Document that the results apply to the selected model, test cases, application, and WAF configuration.
Tools: Python + Test Results + ModSecurity Audit Logs
STEP 16

Review the WAF and Application Configuration

  • Review the ModSecurity deployment and request-routing configuration.
  • Confirm that test traffic passed through the WAF.
  • Verify that the applicable OWASP CRS rules remained active.
  • Review blocking mode and audit-log settings.
  • Check whether any requests bypassed the protected endpoint.
  • Identify configuration limitations that could affect the results.
  • Document any changes needed before a repeat assessment.
Tools: ModSecurity + OWASP CRS + OWASP Juice Shop + Ubuntu Linux
STEP 17

Repeat the Controlled Test and Verify Findings

  • Repeat the validated test set after correcting any identified setup problems.
  • Resubmit the benign baseline requests.
  • Resubmit the validated AI-generated test scenarios.
  • Collect HTTP responses and WAF audit logs again.
  • Compare the repeated results with the initial observations.
  • Confirm which findings are reproducible.
  • Record remaining limitations and unresolved cases.
Tools: Kali Linux + Python Requests + ModSecurity + OWASP CRS + OWASP Juice Shop
STEP 18

Prepare the Final Security Evaluation Report

  • Summarize the laboratory architecture and software configuration.
  • Describe how the public reference dataset was used without naming it.
  • Record the Qwen3 scenario-generation approach and validation criteria.
  • Document the number and categories of test cases evaluated.
  • Include relevant HTTP responses and WAF log evidence.
  • Report observed blocking results and false-positive findings.
  • Explain inconclusive cases and limitations.
  • Provide recommendations for improving test coverage and WAF configuration.
  • Preserve the evidence needed to reproduce the assessment.
  • Finalize the AI-assisted SQL Injection security-testing report.
Tools: Kali Linux + Ubuntu Linux + Python + Qwen3 + ModSecurity + OWASP CRS + OWASP Juice Shop

Outcome

The Qwen3 LLM generates candidate SQL Injection test scenarios using common SQL Injection samples from a publicly available dataset as reference material.

The generated test scenarios are validated and tested against OWASP Juice Shop in an isolated Ubuntu-based laboratory using Kali Linux as the security-testing environment.

ModSecurity and the OWASP Core Rule Set (CRS) inspect incoming HTTP requests and apply the configured SQL Injection detection and blocking rules.

The WAF blocks requests that trigger applicable blocking rules, while ModSecurity audit logs record relevant rule matches and request-handling actions.

Python is used to collect HTTP responses and correlate them with WAF audit logs to evaluate the observed detection and blocking behavior.

Benign application requests are tested to identify potential false positives and verify that legitimate requests are not unnecessarily blocked.

The assessment records the number of validated test cases, observed blocking results, relevant WAF rule events, and inconclusive outcomes.

The generated scenarios are evaluated for relevance and suitability to identify limitations such as malformed requests, duplicate scenarios, and requests that do not exercise a vulnerable application path.

The experiment demonstrates an AI-assisted security-testing workflow that combines LLM-based scenario generation, Kali Linux testing, WAF enforcement, security logging, and evidence-based evaluation.

The final report documents the laboratory configuration, scenario-generation approach, test results, WAF detection and blocking observations, potential false positives, limitations, and recommendations for further security testing.