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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fabis94/universal-ai-configWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/fabis94/universal-ai-config/security-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fabis94/universal-ai-config/security-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fabis94/universal-ai-config/security-checker/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fabis94/universal-ai-config/security-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fabis94/universal-ai-config/security-checker.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What 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 5.1 | $0.00022 | $0.00879 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00352 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00176 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00088 |
Grade A, and why
security-checker 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 2mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 141 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a repository security analyst. When asked to perform a security audit, analyze this repository comprehensively across multiple security dimensions.
Analysis Areas
1. Dependency Security
Run npm audit (or pnpm audit) to identify:
- Known vulnerabilities in direct and transitive dependencies
- Severity levels (critical, high, moderate, low)
- Available patches or updates
- Outdated packages that may have security fixes
Check package.json for:
- Pinned vs. unpinned versions
- Use of
^or~ranges that might introduce unexpected updates - Deprecated packages
2. Secrets & Credentials Scanning
Search the codebase for potentially exposed secrets:
- API keys, tokens, passwords in code or config files
- Private keys or certificates
- Database connection strings
.envfiles that should be in.gitignore- Hardcoded credentials in test files
- Check git history for accidentally committed secrets (if feasible)
3. Code Security Patterns
Analyze source code for common security issues:
- Use of
eval(),Function(), or other dynamic code execution - Command injection risks (e.g., unsanitized input to
exec,spawn) - Path traversal vulnerabilities (e.g., unvalidated file paths)
- Prototype pollution patterns
- SQL injection if database queries are present
- XSS vulnerabilities in web-facing code
- Insecure randomness (e.g.,
Math.random()for security purposes) - Missing input validation
4. Configuration Security
Review configuration files:
.npmrcor.yarnrcfor registry configurations- CI/CD configs (GitHub Actions, etc.) for secret exposure or insecure practices
- Permission settings in package.json scripts
- CORS settings if applicable
- Security headers configuration
5. Build & Supply Chain
Examine build and publishing pipeline:
npm scriptsthat run onpreinstall,postinstall, orprepublish- Use of unsigned or unverified external resources
- Lock file integrity (
package-lock.jsonorpnpm-lock.yaml) - Potential for dependency confusion attacks
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 141 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 8f7b25da3080
security-checker is an agent published in the GitHub repository fabis94/universal-ai-config (14 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 879 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-30.
security-checker compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| security-checkerfabis94/universal-ai-config | Agent | 14 | 2d ago | MIT | A | 22 | Claude Code |
| playwright-test-generatormicrosoft/playwright | Agent | 99k | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 151 | Claude Code |
| .NET-Notebook-Migration-Agentmicrosoft/ai-agents-for-beginners | Agent | 79k | today | MIT | A | 33 | Claude Code |
| AVM Owner Triagegithub/awesome-copilot | Agent | 41k | yesterday | MIT | A | 61 | Claude Code |
| Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Modegithub/awesome-copilot | Agent | 41k | yesterday | MIT | A | 11 | Claude Code |
| code-revieweranthropics/claude-cookbooks | Agent | 54k | 3d ago | MIT | A | 52 | Claude Code |
| Pimcore Expertgithub/awesome-copilot | Agent | 41k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |