security-review

security-review is a cursor rule for Cursor from andr-ca/agentharness. It costs 57 tokens per session (2,180 once invoked), scanned B, original, MIT.

A security checklist for reviewing code against common web risks, including the OWASP Top 10, a widely used list of application security problems.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for security reviews, vulnerability audits, and checking Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, or Go code for common security flaws.
Why use it?
It helps reviewers spot issues such as unauthorized data access, injection attacks, exposed secrets, weak encryption, and unsafe dependencies before release.

Cursor rule for Cursor

Written for Cursor: installed under .cursor/.

Good fit Use it for security reviews, vulnerability audits, and checking Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, or Go code for common security flaws.

Compare 6 cursor rules from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add rules/andr-ca/agentharness/security-review
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/andr-ca/agentharness

Made for: Cursor.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for security-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/andr-ca/agentharness/security-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/rules/andr-ca/agentharness/security-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/andr-ca/agentharness/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/andr-ca/agentharness/security-review/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for security-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/andr-ca/agentharness/security-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/andr-ca/agentharness/security-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 57 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,180 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan B 3 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00057 $0.02180
Opus 5.5 $0.00023 $0.00872
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00011 $0.00436
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00218

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 69083c18ba3c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade B, and why

security-review scanned grade B with 3 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.

Cloud metadata endpointmediumServer-side request forgery

One request to 169.254.169.254 can return temporary IAM credentials.

- Metadata endpoints (AWS `169.254.169.254`, GCP `metadata.google.internal`)

Downgraded: this mod is about security review, or the phrase is quoted, so it is likely naming the pattern rather than instructing it.

Makes network callslowCapability

Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.

response = requests.get(user_provided_url)

Runs shell commandslowCapability

Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.

subprocess.run(f"convert {filename}", shell=True)
.cursor/rules/security-review.mdc · 258 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 258 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Security Review

This skill operationalises the OWASP mandate in this harness's own instructions: "Ensure your code is free from security vulnerabilities outlined in the OWASP Top 10." Work through this checklist for every production-tier code review; prioritise findings as P0 (must fix before merge) or P1 (fix within the sprint).

External reference: OWASP Top 10 (2021).

A01 — Broken Access Control

What to look for: Missing authentication checks, insecure direct object references (IDOR), privilege escalation paths, CORS misconfiguration.

# WRONG: fetches any record by ID — no ownership check
def get_document(doc_id: int) -> Document:
    return db.query(Document).filter_by(id=doc_id).first()

# RIGHT: scope to the authenticated user
def get_document(doc_id: int, current_user: User) -> Document:
    doc = db.query(Document).filter_by(id=doc_id, owner_id=current_user.id).first()
    if doc is None:
        raise NotFoundError()
    return doc

Checklist:

  • Every route/handler checks that the caller owns or is permitted to access the resource it requests.
  • Admin/privileged endpoints require an explicit role check, not just authentication.
  • CORS Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * is not set on endpoints that return sensitive data.

A02 — Cryptographic Failures

What to look for: Hardcoded secrets, weak algorithms (MD5, SHA-1, DES), HTTP instead of HTTPS for sensitive data, secrets logged.

# WRONG: hardcoded API key and weak hashing
API_KEY = "sk-12345abcde"
password_hash = hashlib.md5(password.encode()).hexdigest()

# RIGHT: key from environment; use bcrypt/argon2 for passwords
import os, bcrypt
API_KEY = os.environ["OPENAI_API_KEY"]
password_hash = bcrypt.hashpw(password.encode(), bcrypt.gensalt())

Checklist:

  • No credentials, tokens, or private keys in source code or committed config files. Use .env + .env.sample pattern.
  • Password storage uses bcrypt, argon2, or scrypt — never MD5/SHA-1.
  • Sensitive data transmitted only over TLS; no HTTP fallback for auth.

Read the full file on GitHub · 258 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 258 lines · 57 tokens per session scan B 69083c18ba3c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

security-review is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository andr-ca/agentharness (1 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 2,180 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it B with 3 findings (cloud metadata endpoint, makes network calls, runs shell commands). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.