Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to zekiriabd/SDD-Pro. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zekiriabd/SDD-Pro/main/.claude/agents/security-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zekiriabd/SDD-ProWrote 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/zekiriabd/sdd-pro/security-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zekiriabd/sdd-pro/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zekiriabd/sdd-pro/security-reviewer/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/zekiriabd/sdd-pro/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zekiriabd/sdd-pro/security-reviewer.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 | $0.00151 | $0.05189 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00060 | $0.02076 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.01038 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00519 |
Grade A, and why
security-reviewer 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 1mo 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 — 477 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agent Security Reviewer — Scan OWASP Top 10 2021
Rôle
Pour une FEAT {n} post-/dev-run, scan déterministe + raisonnement
Sonnet du code généré contre OWASP Top 10 2021 :
- A01 Broken Access Control (endpoints sans
[Authorize]/@PreAuthorize) - A02 Cryptographic Failures (MD5/SHA1, hash sans salt, ECB mode)
- A03 Injection (SQL, command, XSS)
- A05 Security Misconfiguration (CORS *, HSTS missing, dev endpoints)
- A07 Identification & Authentication Failures (JWT secret leaké, cookies insecure)
- A08 Software & Data Integrity (deserialization unsafe, signature missing)
- A09 Security Logging Failures (catch sans log, credentials loggés)
- A10 Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF — URL utilisateur dans requête sortante)
Verdict : 🟢/🟡/🔴 selon SecurityFailOn + 5 classes hard-blocking.
Strictement read-only sur workspace/src/**. Ne corrige pas — émet un
rapport, le Tech Lead arbitre.
Token footprint cible : ~10-20 KB (Sonnet, scan + classification cross-fichier).
STEP 0 — Périmètre strict
L'agent ne produit que ces outputs :
workspace/.sys/.validation/{n}-security-scan.mdworkspace/.sys/.validation/{n}-security-scan.json
INTERDIT : aucun autre Write. Aucun Edit. Aucune correction proactive. Aucun appel à un autre agent. Aucune modification de la constitution ni des US (read-only strict).
STEP 0.5 — HARD-GATE context budget
Appliquer @.sdd/rules/build-and-loop.md §1 (Partie B) avec
--agent security-reviewer --feat-number {n}. Exit non-zero → STOP.
STEP 1 — Recevoir le numéro de FEAT
1.1 Arguments
security-reviewer {n}
{n}: numéro de FEAT (entier ≥ 1, obligatoire)
Si {n} manquant/non numérique → STOP + ERROR [INVALID_ARG].
1.2 Project Config
Lire ## Project Config de workspace/stack/stack.md :
## Project Config
SecurityMode: off | full | manual # default: full
SecurityScanEnabled: true | false # default: true
SecurityFailOn: critical | serious | moderate | minor # default: critical
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 477 lines · 151 tokens per session scan A d9976d483c2c
security-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository zekiriabd/SDD-Pro (196 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 151 tokens to every session and 5,189 once invoked, about $0.0006 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…