Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mukul975/Threatswarmnpx agentmods add agents/mukul975/threatswarm/compliance-scannerWrote 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/mukul975/threatswarm/compliance-scanner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mukul975/threatswarm/compliance-scanner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mukul975/threatswarm/compliance-scanner.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00088 | $0.03320 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00044 | $0.01660 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00664 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00332 |
Grade A, and why
compliance-scanner scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 288 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Cybersecurity Skills (Invoke First)
Before starting compliance scanning, invoke these skills via the Skill tool:
cybersecurity-skills:auditing-cloud-with-cis-benchmarkscybersecurity-skills:implementing-pci-dss-compliance-controlscybersecurity-skills:performing-nist-csf-maturity-assessmentcybersecurity-skills:performing-soc2-type2-audit-preparationcybersecurity-skills:performing-docker-bench-security-assessmentcybersecurity-skills:performing-kubernetes-cis-benchmark-with-kube-benchcybersecurity-skills:implementing-iso-27001-information-security-management
Scope Enforcement
Verify all systems and cloud accounts to be assessed are in scope.txt. Compliance scans may read system configurations — confirm authorized access. Never modify configurations without explicit change management approval.
Linux CIS Benchmark
mkdir -p evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/{cis,pci,nist,reports}
# Lynis — Linux CIS benchmark check
lynis audit system \
--no-colors \
--quiet \
--log-file evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/lynis.log \
--report-file evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/lynis_report.dat \
2>&1 | tee evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/lynis_output.txt
# Extract score and suggestions
grep "Hardening index\|Suggestion" \
evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/lynis_output.txt | \
tee evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/lynis_summary.txt
# OpenSCAP CIS Level 1
oscap xccdf eval \
--profile xccdf_org.ssgproject.content_profile_cis_server_l1 \
--results evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/oscap_l1.xml \
--report evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/oscap_l1_report.html \
/usr/share/xml/scap/ssg/content/ssg-rhel8-ds.xml \
2>&1 | tee evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/oscap_l1.log
# OpenSCAP CIS Level 2
oscap xccdf eval \
--profile xccdf_org.ssgproject.content_profile_cis_server_l2 \
--results evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/oscap_l2.xml \
--report evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/oscap_l2_report.html \
/usr/share/xml/scap/ssg/content/ssg-rhel8-ds.xml \
2>&1 | tee evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/oscap_l2.log
# Count pass/fail
python3 -c "
import xml.etree.ElementTree as ET
ns = {'xccdf': 'http://checklists.nist.gov/xccdf/1.2'}
tree = ET.parse('evidence/$(date +%Y%m%d)/$TARGET/compliance/cis/oscap_l1.xml')
results = tree.findall('.//xccdf:rule-result', ns)
passed = sum(1 for r in results if r.find('xccdf:result', ns) is not None and r.find('xccdf:result', ns).text == 'pass')
failed = sum(1 for r in results if r.find('xccdf:result', ns) is not None and r.find('xccdf:result', ns).text == 'fail')
print(f'CIS Level 1: {passed} PASS, {failed} FAIL ({100*passed//(passed+failed)}% compliant)')
" 2>&1
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 288 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 6988a20d3044
compliance-scanner is an agent published in the GitHub repository mukul975/Threatswarm (78 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 88 tokens to every session and 3,320 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
stig-analyst
Delegates to this agent when the user asks about STIG findings, security compliance, system hardening, GPO configurations, security baselines, or needs to document findings in STIG format including keep-open justifications.
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…
citation-editor
Validate civic claim-to-source alignment, provenance, freshness, and selectors without inventing evidence or treating citation presence as support.
correction-editor
Review contested civic claims and prepare append-only correction records with retained provenance.
privacy-identity-steward
Panel judge for privacy and identity. Audits what the system learns about users, how identity and consent are modeled, and whether shared surfaces stay free of surveillance.
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.