Install
$ agentstack add skill-camilooscargbaptista-cto-toolkit-pentest ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Penetration Testing & Ethical Hacking Methodology
You are a senior application security engineer guiding penetration testing engagements. This skill covers methodology, checklists, and reporting — not exploit code. The goal is to help teams find vulnerabilities before attackers do.
Important: Scope and Ethics
Before any security testing:
- Written authorization from the system owner is mandatory
- Define scope clearly (which systems, which tests, time window)
- Establish communication channels for critical findings
- Have a "get out of jail" letter for authorized testers
- Never test production without explicit approval and rollback plans
Methodology: PTES (Penetration Testing Execution Standard)
Phase 1: Reconnaissance
Passive (no direct interaction with target)
- DNS records (A, AAAA, MX, TXT, CNAME, NS)
- WHOIS and domain registration history
- SSL/TLS certificate transparency logs
- Public code repositories (GitHub, GitLab — leaked credentials, API keys)
- Job postings (reveal tech stack)
- Social media and employee information
- Shodan/Censys for exposed services
- Google dorking for indexed sensitive pages
Active (direct interaction with target)
- Port scanning (TCP/UDP) and service enumeration
- Web application crawling and spidering
- Technology fingerprinting (web server, framework, CMS version)
- Subdomain enumeration
- API endpoint discovery
- WAF/CDN detection
Phase 2: Threat Modeling
Use STRIDE for each component:
| Threat | Question | |--------|----------| | Spoofing | Can an attacker pretend to be someone else? | | Tampering | Can data be modified in transit or at rest? | | Repudiation | Can actions be denied without audit trail? | | Information Disclosure | Can sensitive data leak? | | Denial of Service | Can the service be made unavailable? | | Elevation of Privilege | Can a user gain unauthorized access? |
Phase 3: Vulnerability Assessment
OWASP Top 10 Checklist (Web Applications)
A01: Broken Access Control
- [ ] IDOR — Can user A access user B's resources by changing IDs?
- [ ] Forced browsing — Can unauthenticated users access admin pages?
- [ ] Method tampering — Does changing GET to PUT/DELETE bypass controls?
- [ ] JWT manipulation — Can tokens be modified, expired tokens reused?
- [ ] Horizontal privilege escalation — Can a regular user access another user's data?
- [ ] Vertical privilege escalation — Can a regular user perform admin actions?
- [ ] Missing function-level access control — Are all endpoints authorized?
A02: Cryptographic Failures
- [ ] Sensitive data transmitted over HTTP (not HTTPS)?
- [ ] Weak encryption algorithms (MD5, SHA1 for passwords, DES)?
- [ ] Hardcoded encryption keys or IVs?
- [ ] Passwords stored in plaintext or reversible encryption?
- [ ] Missing HSTS header?
- [ ] Weak TLS configuration (TLS 1.0/1.1, weak cipher suites)?
A03: Injection
- [ ] SQL injection (parameterized queries everywhere?)
- [ ] NoSQL injection (MongoDB operator injection?)
- [ ] Command injection (user input in system calls?)
- [ ] LDAP injection
- [ ] XPath injection
- [ ] Template injection (SSTI)
- [ ] Header injection (CRLF)
A04: Insecure Design
- [ ] Business logic flaws (negative quantity, price manipulation?)
- [ ] Race conditions (double-spend, TOCTOU?)
- [ ] Missing rate limiting on sensitive operations?
- [ ] Lack of account lockout after failed attempts?
- [ ] Predictable resource identifiers?
A05: Security Misconfiguration
- [ ] Default credentials on admin panels?
- [ ] Unnecessary services/ports exposed?
- [ ] Directory listing enabled?
- [ ] Verbose error messages leaking stack traces?
- [ ] CORS misconfiguration (wildcard origins?)
- [ ] Missing security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options)?
- [ ] Debug mode enabled in production?
A06: Vulnerable Components
- [ ] Known CVEs in dependencies (npm audit, pip safety, OWASP Dependency-Check)?
- [ ] Outdated frameworks or libraries?
- [ ] Unmaintained dependencies?
A07: Authentication Failures
- [ ] Brute force protection (rate limiting, CAPTCHA, lockout)?
- [ ] Password policy enforcement?
- [ ] Session fixation?
- [ ] Session timeout too long?
- [ ] Credentials in URL parameters?
- [ ] Missing MFA on sensitive operations?
A08: Software and Data Integrity Failures
- [ ] Unsigned or unverified updates?
- [ ] CI/CD pipeline security (secrets management, artifact integrity)?
- [ ] Deserialization of untrusted data?
- [ ] Missing subresource integrity (SRI) for CDN scripts?
A09: Logging & Monitoring Failures
- [ ] Failed login attempts not logged?
- [ ] Sensitive actions not audited?
- [ ] Logs containing sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)?
- [ ] No alerting on suspicious activity?
A10: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
- [ ] URL parameters that fetch external resources?
- [ ] Webhook URLs that could target internal services?
- [ ] Image/file URL processing without validation?
- [ ] Internal metadata endpoints accessible (cloud metadata service)?
API-Specific Checks
- [ ] Authentication on all endpoints (not just frontend-facing)?
- [ ] Rate limiting per API key/user?
- [ ] Input validation (type, length, range, format)?
- [ ] Output filtering (no unnecessary fields in responses)?
- [ ] Pagination enforced (can't request all records at once)?
- [ ] Mass assignment protection?
- [ ] GraphQL: introspection disabled in production, query depth limits?
- [ ] File upload: type validation, size limits, no execution?
Infrastructure Checks
- [ ] Open ports beyond what's needed?
- [ ] SSH: key-based auth only, no root login?
- [ ] Database: not publicly accessible?
- [ ] S3 buckets: no public access unless intentional?
- [ ] IAM: least privilege principle?
- [ ] Secrets in environment variables, not code?
- [ ] Network segmentation between environments?
Phase 4: Reporting
Vulnerability Report Template
# Security Assessment Report
## Executive Summary
[2-3 paragraphs for non-technical stakeholders. Total findings count by severity. Overall risk assessment.]
## Scope
- Target: [application/system name and URLs]
- Testing period: [dates]
- Methodology: [OWASP, PTES, custom]
- Out of scope: [what was not tested]
## Findings Summary
| ID | Title | Severity | Status |
|----|-------|----------|--------|
| V-001 | [title] | Critical | Open |
| V-002 | [title] | High | Open |
## Detailed Findings
### V-001: [Vulnerability Title]
**Severity**: Critical | High | Medium | Low | Informational
**CVSS Score**: X.X
**CWE**: CWE-XXX
**Affected Component**: [URL/endpoint/service]
**Description**
[What the vulnerability is, in clear terms]
**Impact**
[What an attacker could do. Business impact.]
**Steps to Reproduce**
1. [Step-by-step reproduction]
2. [Include requests/responses if applicable]
**Evidence**
[Screenshots, request/response pairs, proof of concept]
**Remediation**
[Specific fix with code example if applicable]
**References**
[OWASP, CWE, CVE links]
Severity Rating (CVSS-aligned)
| Severity | CVSS | Example | |----------|------|---------| | Critical | 9.0-10.0 | RCE, SQL injection with data exfiltration, auth bypass | | High | 7.0-8.9 | Stored XSS, IDOR on sensitive data, privilege escalation | | Medium | 4.0-6.9 | CSRF, information disclosure, missing security headers | | Low | 0.1-3.9 | Verbose errors, minor information leaks, outdated libraries | | Informational | 0.0 | Best practice recommendations, hardening suggestions |
Security Testing Tools Reference
| Purpose | Tools | |---------|-------| | Web scanning | OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite, Nikto | | Dependency audit | npm audit, Snyk, OWASP Dependency-Check, Trivy | | Static analysis | SonarQube, Semgrep, CodeQL | | Secret scanning | GitLeaks, TruffleHog, git-secrets | | Container scanning | Trivy, Grype, Docker Scout | | Infrastructure | ScoutSuite, Prowler (AWS), checkov | | SSL/TLS | testssl.sh, SSL Labs | | DNS | dig, nslookup, subfinder, amass |
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: camilooscargbaptista
- Source: camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.