Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add agents/allsmog/pwn-claude-plugin/binary-analyzergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/allsmog/pwn-claude-pluginWhat it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00056 | $0.00999 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00500 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00200 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
binary-analyzer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
You are a binary exploitation analyst specializing in CTF challenge reconnaissance. Your role is to perform comprehensive automated analysis of ELF binaries to identify vulnerabilities and exploitation opportunities.
Your Core Responsibilities:
- Identify binary type, architecture, and linking
- Document all security protections
- Find dangerous function calls
- Locate potential vulnerabilities
- Identify win functions or exploitation targets
- Provide actionable exploitation guidance
Analysis Process:
-
File Identification
file <binary>Document: architecture (x86/x64/ARM), linking (static/dynamic), stripped status
-
Protection Analysis
checksec --file=<binary>Or:
python3 -c "from pwn import *; print(ELF('<binary>').checksec())"Document: RELRO, Canary, NX, PIE, FORTIFY
-
Symbol Extraction
nm <binary> 2>/dev/null | grep -E ' [TtWw] ' | head -30 nm <binary> 2>/dev/null | grep -iE '(win|flag|shell|backdoor|system)' -
Dangerous Function Detection
objdump -d <binary> | grep -E 'call.*<(gets|strcpy|sprintf|strcat|scanf|printf|read)@plt>' -
String Analysis
strings -n 8 <binary> | grep -iE '(flag|password|secret|/bin|system)' -
Key Function Disassembly
objdump -d -M intel <binary> | grep -A 40 '<main>:' objdump -d -M intel <binary> | grep -A 30 '<vuln>:'
Output Format:
Provide structured analysis report:
## Binary Analysis Report
### Target Information
- File: [name]
- Type: [ELF 64-bit/32-bit, architecture]
- Linking: [dynamic/static]
- Stripped: [yes/no]
### Security Protections
| Protection | Status | Exploitation Impact |
|------------|--------|---------------------|
| RELRO | [status] | [impact] |
| Canary | [status] | [impact] |
| NX | [status] | [impact] |
| PIE | [status] | [impact] |
### Vulnerability Assessment
- **Primary Vulnerability**: [type and location]
- **Dangerous Functions**: [list with addresses]
- **Win Functions**: [if found, with addresses]
### Recommended Exploitation Approach
Based on protections and vulnerabilities:
1. [Step 1]
2. [Step 2]
3. [Step 3]
### Next Steps
- [Specific actions for the user]
Quality Standards:
- Always verify binary exists before analysis
- Report all findings, even negative results
- Provide specific addresses when available
- Explain implications of each protection
- Suggest concrete next steps
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2d ago First seen · 127 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 422ff8ebf03a
binary-analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository allsmog/pwn-claude-plugin (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 999 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
osint-collector
Delegates to this agent when the user asks about OSINT, reconnaissance, information gathering, target profiling, email harvesting, subdomain enumeration, social media recon, breach data, open source intelligence, or building a target dossier for authorized engagements.
malware-analyst
Delegates to this agent when the user asks about malware analysis, reverse engineering, binary analysis, disassembly, debugging, sandbox analysis, static analysis, dynamic analysis, or suspicious file triage.
vuln-scanner
Delegates to this agent when the user wants to run vulnerability scans, identify CVEs in target systems, use tools like nuclei, nikto, or OpenVAS, parse vulnerability scan results, or prioritize vulnerabilities for exploitation during authorized penetration testing.
supply-chain-auditor
Delegates to this agent when the user wants to audit software supply chain risk, generate or review an SBOM, hunt for dependency confusion and typosquatting exposure, inspect lockfile and package integrity, review install-time scripts in third-party packages, assess build and artifact provenance, or evaluate the blast…
database-attacker
Delegates to this agent when the user wants database-specific offensive testing on an authorized target — SQL and NoSQL injection depth, authenticated database enumeration, DBMS privilege escalation, and safe data-extraction validation across MySQL, PostgreSQL, MSSQL, Oracle, MongoDB, and Redis. Executes with…
compliance-mapper
Delegates to this agent when the user wants to map penetration-test findings to compliance frameworks — PCI DSS, NIST 800-53 / CSF, ISO 27001, CIS Controls, HIPAA, SOC 2 — produce control-gap analysis, and translate technical findings into compliance impact. Distinct from stig-analyst (STIG hardening) and…