AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL unreviewed MIT Self-run

Afc:security

skill-jhlee0409-all-for-claudecode-security · by jhlee0409

Security scan — vulnerability check and threat assessment

No reviews yet
0 installs
20 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-jhlee0409-all-for-claudecode-security

Open-source listing, not yet scanned by AgentStack. Follow the source repository for install instructions.

Security review

⚠ Flagged

1 finding(s); flagged for manual review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures
  • high Dangerous shell/eval execution.

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets Used
  • Dynamic code execution Used

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.

View the full security report →

Reliability & compatibility

Not yet reviewed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
4mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

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 →
Are you the author of Afc:security? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

/afc:security — Security Scan

> Detects and reports security vulnerabilities in the codebase. > Inspects against OWASP Top 10. Read-only — does not modify code.

Arguments

  • $ARGUMENTS — (optional) scan scope (file/directory path, or "full" for full scan)
  • If not specified: scans only files changed in the current branch

Config Load

Architecture, Code Style, and Project Context are auto-loaded via .claude/rules/afc-project.md. Read .claude/afc.config.md if CI commands are needed.

If neither rules file nor config exists: read CLAUDE.md for framework info. Assume "unknown" if no source has it.

For dependency audit command: infer from packageManager field in package.json or the lockfile (e.g., npm audit, yarn audit, pnpm audit).

Execution Steps

1. Determine Scan Scope

  • $ARGUMENTS = path → that path only
  • $ARGUMENTS = "full" → entire codebase
  • Not specified → changed files from:

!git diff --name-only HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "[GIT_DIFF_FAILED]"

2. Agent Teams (when scan complexity warrants it)

Use Agent Teams when the scan scope is complex enough that a single-pass review would miss cross-file vulnerability patterns. Assess holistically:

  • File types: Auth handlers, trust boundary code, and input-processing layers warrant deeper multi-agent scrutiny than config files or simple utilities
  • Code volume: Large files with dense logic benefit from focused agent attention
  • Diversity of concerns: Multiple distinct security domains (auth + injection + data exposure) across separate modules
  • Trust boundaries: Files that cross privilege levels (user input → DB, client → server, public → internal API)

Use Agent Teams when any of the following apply:

  • Scan includes auth handlers, session management, or access control logic spanning multiple files
  • Input entry points and their sanitization/consumption code live in different directories
  • The scope spans multiple distinct security domains that cannot be assessed in a single coherent pass

Use direct scan (orchestrator only) when:

  • Scope is a single module or tightly-coupled set of files
  • Security concerns are localized (e.g., one feature, one data flow)
  • No cross-file trust boundary transitions are involved

Pre-scan: Data Flow Context (before distributing to agents, when using Agent Teams):

  1. For each changed file, identify input entry points (user input, API params, URL params, form data) and sanitization calls (validation, escaping, encoding)
  2. Trace input flow across changed files: where does user input enter? Where is it sanitized? Where is it consumed?
  3. Include this context in each agent's prompt:

``` ## Data Flow Context Input flows relevant to your scan scope:

  • User input enters via req.body in api/routes.ts → sanitized by validateInput() in shared/validation.ts → consumed in features/user.ts
  • URL params enter via req.params in api/routes.ts → NO sanitization found → used in features/search.ts

Account for these flows when assessing injection/XSS severity. ```

Task("Security scan: src/features/", subagent_type: general-purpose,
  prompt: "... {include Data Flow Context} ...")
Task("Security scan: src/shared/api/", subagent_type: general-purpose,
  prompt: "... {include Data Flow Context} ...")

For direct scans (orchestrator only): skip pre-scan — orchestrator has full context.

2.5. Cross-Boundary Verification

Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/cross-boundary-verification.md and apply it after parallel agent results are collected.

3. Security Check Items

A. Injection (A03:2021)
  • Uses of dangerouslySetInnerHTML
  • User input inserted directly into DOM/URL/queries
  • Uses of eval(), new Function()
B. Broken Authentication (A07:2021)
  • Hardcoded tokens or credentials
  • API routes accessible without authentication
  • Session management vulnerabilities
C. Sensitive Data Exposure (A02:2021)
  • .env values exposed to the client (check framework-specific public env variables from Project Context)
  • Sensitive information printed via console.log
  • Internal details exposed in error messages
D. Security Misconfiguration (A05:2021)
  • CORS configuration
  • CSP headers
  • Unnecessary debug mode enabled
E. XSS (A03:2021)
  • Patterns that bypass React's default escaping
  • URL parameters rendered without validation
  • Dynamic injection of iframes or scripts
F. Dependencies (A06:2021)
  • Packages with known vulnerabilities (dependency audit tool results)
  • Outdated dependencies

4. Output Results

## Security Scan Results

### Summary
| Severity | Count |
|----------|-------|
| Critical | {N} |
| High | {N} |
| Medium | {N} |
| Low | {N} |

### Findings

#### SEC-{NNN}: {title}
- **Category**: {OWASP code}
- **File**: {path}:{line}
- **Description**: {vulnerability details}
- **Impact**: {impact if exploited}
- **Mitigation**: {how to fix}

### Dependency Audit
{dependency audit command result summary — if executable}

### Recommended Actions
{prioritized fix suggestions}

5. Final Output

Security scan complete
├─ Scope: {file count} files
├─ Found: Critical {N} / High {N} / Medium {N} / Low {N}
└─ Recommended: {most urgent action}

Notes

  • Read-only: Does not modify code. Reports security issues only.
  • Minimize false positives: Account for React's default XSS defenses. Report only genuinely dangerous patterns.
  • Handle sensitive data carefully: Do not include actual token or password values in scan results.
  • Consider context: Reflect security specifics for the project's framework environment (from Project Context).

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.