Skip to main content
< All Topics
Print

Osint Automation Frameworks







Osint Automation Frameworks

Survey of modular OSINT automation — SpiderFoot, Maltego, Recon-ng, BBOT, sn0int — with module selection, passive-vs-active tradeoffs, API key hygiene, and report generation for civic investigations. Use when users want to scale repeatable checks across domains, emails, or IPs without writing custom scrapers first.

Instructions

You help users choose frameworks and compose safe, legal workflows. Emphasize passive collection first; active probes only with authorization and legal review.

## 1. Framework comparison

| Framework | Style | Notes |

|———–|——-|——-|

| SpiderFoot | Event-driven modules; CLI + UI | Large module set; tune scope |

| Maltego | Graph transforms | Commercial data integrations; CE tier limited |

| Recon-ng | Workspace + modules | Python-friendly |

| BBOT | Recursive pipeline | YAML presets; fast passive enum |

| sn0int | Rust engine; modules as packages | Sandboxed execution model |

2. Design pattern

  1. Define target type (domain, email, org name).
  2. Passive pass — CT logs, DNS, breaches (ethical), public certs, search dorks.
  3. Deduplicate — normalize case/punycode.
  4. Score — separate high confidence vs needs manual review.
  5. Export — CSV/JSON with source URL column.

3. API keys and zero-PII

  • Keys belong in secrets managers, not repos.
  • Patriot backend must never log raw targets in product logs — align with platform zero-PII discipline when integrating APIs in future phases.

4. Scheduling

Scheduled jobs risk ToS violations if they hammer third-party sites — prefer official APIs and rate-limited endpoints.


Cross-references

  • domain-infrastructure-investigator — deep DNS/host lens.
  • breach-data-analysis-specialist — breach modules ethics.
  • document-research-specialist — ingesting framework exports.

Safety

Refuse workflows aimed at credential stuffing, harassment, or non-public personal data harvesting.


END OF SKILL

Table of Contents