PAGES
← all tools
◆ Reconnaissance & OSINT

cloud-enum

0.8 open-source

Enumerates public resources across AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud using OSINTOSINTOpen-source intelligence, collecting and analyzing information from publicly available sources. Investigators use it to learn about people, infrastructure or threats. and keyword-based fuzzing.

source ↗ rss ↗ What is a cyber toolchain?

Summary

cloud-enum is an open-source command-line tool that searches AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud for exposed public resources — S3 buckets, Azure storage accounts and blob containers, GCP buckets, Firebase databases and apps, App Engine sites, and Cloud Functions — by brute-forcing names and DNS/HTTP checks against keywords you supply. It's aimed at pentesters and red teamers doing OSINT-driven recon during cloud-focused engagements. The README is candid about its trajectory: the author built it in 2019 when nothing else covered Azure, no longer uses it actively, and is steering contributors toward migrating its checks into Nuclei as templates, positioning that project as the long-term home for this functionality.

Enumerates public resources across AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud using OSINT and keyword-based fuzzing.

How cloud-enum helps

Which unsecured storage buckets under my organization's name are exposed across AWS, Azure, and GCP?

brute-forces bucket/account names built from your supplied keywords against each provider's naming scheme and DNS/HTTP endpoints, reporting which ones exist and whether they're open, protected, or private

Have any of my company's Azure services been stood up with predictable names and left exposed?

mutates your keywords against Azure storage accounts, blob containers, databases, virtual machines, and web apps, flagging which resolve and respond publicly

Did an old or forgotten AWS WorkMail/WorkDocs/Connect instance leak under my company's name?

runs the same keyword-based fuzzing against AWS awsapps naming patterns and reports which ones exist

Which of the exposed assets found are worth escalating versus just noise from name collisions?

distinguishes open, protected, and closed/non-existent resources in its output so you can prioritize genuinely accessible data over resources that merely resolve

Languages

Not documented

Score card

  1. Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
  2. Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
  3. Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
  4. Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
  5. Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
  6. Community health
  7. Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
  8. Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
  9. Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
  10. Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply

Nine scores for cloud-enum, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.

Score cards are part of every paid plan.

See plans →

Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.

How this is scored
  • Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
  • Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
  • Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
  • Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
  • Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
  • Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
  • Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
  • Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.

Release-note detail over time

See how much detail cloud-enum puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.

Checking release-note history…

Explore the full chart →

Releases

Show

3 entries

  1. May 20261
  3. April 20221
  5. September 20191
    Show

    3 entries

    1. 0.8 May 21, 2026 · release notes

      cloud-enum 0.8 adds firebaseapp.com checks, more Azure object types, a nameserver-file option, and improved fuzzing lists.

      └──▷ GET THIS VERSION 
      $ git clone --branch 0.8 https://github.com/initstring/cloud_enum.git
# already have the repo? check out this version:
$ git checkout 0.8
      • Adds firebaseapp.com domain enumeration checks alongside existing Firebase coverage.
      • Expands Azure object detection to cover more resource types, including *.scm.azurewebsites.net sites.
      • Improves the built-in fuzzing/mutation wordlist for broader cloud asset discovery.
      • Changes the default DNS resolver to Cloudflare for more reliable lookups.
      • Adds a DNS retry system to handle timeouts without dropping results.
      +1 more show less
      • Enforces a 63-character payload limit, matching DNS label constraints.

      6 details in Everything

      └──▷ BREAKING ON UPGRADE
      • !setup.py is dropped in favour of uv; projects that installed cloud-enum via python setup.py install will need to switch to the uv-based workflow.
    2. 0.7 Apr 2, 2022 · release notes

      Adds JSON and CSV logging formats with finding severity tagging

      └──▷ GET THIS VERSION 
      $ git clone --branch 0.7 https://github.com/initstring/cloud_enum.git
# already have the repo? check out this version:
$ git checkout 0.7
      • Adds support for json and csv log output formats alongside the existing text default via the new log format option
      • Enables tagging of findings based on their public/accessible level in the supported log formats

      2 details in Everything

    3. v0.1 Sep 2, 2019 · release notes

      cloud_enum v0.1 first release supporting enumeration of S3 buckets, Azure storage/VMs/WebApps, and GCP resources.

      └──▷ GET THIS VERSION 
      $ git clone --branch v0.1 https://github.com/initstring/cloud_enum.git
# already have the repo? check out this version:
$ git checkout v0.1
      • Adds support for Microsoft Azure enumeration: Storage Accounts, Open Blob Storage Containers, Hosted Databases, Virtual Machines, and Web Apps.
      • Adds support for Google Cloud Platform enumeration: Open GCP Buckets, Protected GCP Buckets, and Google App Engine sites.

      2 details in Everything

    Project health

    Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in initstring/cloud_enum, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.

    1. Contributors 2 ±0 vs prior 12 months
    2. Maintainers 0 +0 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
    3. Bus factor 0 committers behind half the commits
    4. Community-filed not measured of issues opened, last 12 months
    5. Median time to close 589 days issues closed, last 12 months
    6. Open backlog 0 of 32 issues ever filed
    1. Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
    2. Open backlog 0
    3. Contributors / month 0
    4. Commits / month 0
    5. Stars 2,138
    Issue themes, last 12 months not measured

    Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this

    Add the badge to your README

    Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.

    Tracked by Cyber Toolchain Choose a badge style and copy the code →
    compare.md

      Free the public facts, no sign-in Any paid plan all other sections Researcher & Business pricing history and category rank

      my-toolchain — 0 tools

        Betas, release candidates and previews. Turn it off to see final releases only. It also applies to changes you ask for over MCP when you're signed in.
        browse all tools → score card for your toolchain →
        cyber-toolchain / feedback

        Send us feedback