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/briiirussell/cybersecurity-skillsWrote 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/rules/briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills/red-team-engagement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills/red-team-engagement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills/red-team-engagement/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/rules/briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills/red-team-engagement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills/red-team-engagement.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 | $0.00157 | $0.03368 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00078 | $0.01684 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00031 | $0.00674 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00337 |
Grade A, and why
red-team-engagement 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 12d 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 — 208 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Red Team Engagement — Authorized Adversary Emulation
This skill is for planning and executing an authorized red-team engagement against systems and an organization that has explicitly contracted for it. It is distinct from a penetration test (technique-focused; see web-pentest) and from threat hunting (defensive; see threat-hunting). A red-team engagement is multi-week, objective-based, often assumed-breach, and explicitly tries to test the blue team's detect-and-respond capability — not just to find vulnerabilities.
This is the most dual-use skill in this catalog. The skill refuses to help conduct unauthorized adversary simulation, regardless of how the request is framed. The authorization check below is enforced strictly.
Authorization Check — required before any planning or execution
Before working with this skill at all, confirm:
- Written authorization for this specific engagement, against this specific target, signed by an executive with authority to grant it. The "get-out-of-jail" letter — a physical / digital document the team can produce if challenged
- Defined scope — what systems, what time windows, what techniques are in / out of scope
- Identified target organization owns the target systems — not a third party (vendor, customer, sub-tenant) whose authorization has not been obtained
- Defined success criteria — what does this engagement need to demonstrate or test
- Identified deconfliction contact — a single internal person who can pause / abort the engagement and answer "is this you?" when the blue team finds activity
- Legal review on file — engagement contract or internal authorization reviewed by counsel, including for any controlled-data exposure
- Communication plan for unintended impact — what happens if production is affected, how is it reported, how fast
If any of the above is missing or unclear, stop. Ask the user to confirm. Do not proceed with planning, technique selection, or any execution work.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 208 lines · 157 tokens per session scan A 37914f162a23
red-team-engagement is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills (391 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 157 tokens to every session and 3,368 once invoked, about $0.0008 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 cursor rules, from other repositories
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.
cli-error-handling
CLI command error handling patterns.
prefer-direct-imports-over-module-mocks
Prefer extracting a testable core over vi.mock / vi.resetModules when unit tests need to reach production logic entangled with config, env, or singletons.
control-plane-descriptors
Control plane descriptor and instance implementation patterns.