ffuf/ffuf · error

No common filtering values found

Error message

No common filtering values found

What it means

calibrateFilters could not derive any baseline filter from the autocalibration responses: the collected calibration responses had no common line/word/size value suitable for creating an auto-filter, so the function fell through all branches and returned this sentinel error. It means the calibration data was inconclusive (responses too varied or empty), not that a request failed — per-domain or generic filter creation was simply impossible.

Source

Thrown at pkg/engine/autocalibration.go:274

					}
				}
				_ = j.Config.MatcherManager.AddPerDomainFilter(ffuf.HostURLFromRequest(*responses[0].Request), "line", strconv.FormatInt(baselineLines, 10))
				return nil
			} else {
				// Check if already filtered
				for _, f := range j.Config.MatcherManager.GetFilters() {
					match, _ := f.Filter(&responses[0])
					if match {
						// Already filtered
						return nil
					}
				}
				_ = j.Config.MatcherManager.AddFilter("line", strconv.FormatInt(baselineLines, 10), false)
				return nil
			}
		}
	}
	return fmt.Errorf("No common filtering values found")
}

View on GitHub (pinned to 33c67d28c8)

Solutions

1. Rerun with autocalibration against a stabler target or one where random-value probes produce consistent response sizes/line counts
2. Provide explicit -fl/-fs/-fw filters instead of relying on autocalibration
3. Increase the number of calibration requests (-acr) so a common baseline is more likely to emerge

When it happens

Trigger: Thrown at pkg/engine/autocalibration.go:274 when the library encounters an invalid state.

Common situations: See trigger scenarios.

AI-assisted analysis of ffuf/ffuf@33c67d28c8 (2026-09-04). Data as JSON: /api/errors/0415de52cfaa5483. Report an issue: GitHub.