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.
npx skills add 0dayInc/pwn --skill bug-bounty-huntinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/0dayInc/pwnWrote 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/skills/0dayinc/pwn/bug-bounty-hunting)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/0dayinc/pwn/bug-bounty-hunting"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0dayinc/pwn/bug-bounty-hunting/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/skills/0dayinc/pwn/bug-bounty-hunting"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0dayinc/pwn/bug-bounty-hunting.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high YARA Match · line 37 YARA rule matched a hack tool or exploit indicator (offensive tools, reconnaissance, privilege escalation, or exploit frameworks).Fix: Remove offensive tool references and exploit code. Legitimate agent skills should not contain penetration testing tools, exploit frameworks, or reconnaissance utilities.
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 | $0.00026 | $0.00744 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00372 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00149 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00074 |
Grade A, and why
bug-bounty-hunting 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 — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Bug Bounty Hunting
Use when the ask is a program (HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Synack, or a private
target list): read scope, test in-scope assets, write a report. A listing
of documentation/ or a green rspec run is not a program tested.
When to use
- "test this bounty program"
- "authz replay / IDOR / broken access control"
- submit or draft a HackerOne-style report
Methodologies
- OWASP WSTG + OWASP Top 10 / API Top 10 for the hunt classes
- Bugcrowd VRT / HackerOne severity for ranking (program table wins)
- PTES Intelligence Gathering + Vulnerability Analysis, then a short report
- CWE-284 / CWE-639 / CWE-918 / CWE-79 as the usual bounty labels
Tooling
- Programs:
PWN::WWW::HackerOne,PWN::WWW::BugCrowd,PWN::WWW::SynackandPWN::Plugins::HackerOnefor the API. - Session + scan:
PWN::Plugins::BurpSuite(preferred), ZAP as fallback. - Browser:
PWN::Plugins::TransparentBrowserthrough the proxy (devtools: truewhen the ask needs DOM/network). - Authz:
PWN::Bounty::LifecycleAuthzReplayon a captured HAR with a second principal. - Crawl / API:
PWN::Plugins::Spider,PWN::Plugins::OpenAPI. - Report:
PWN::Reports::*, then the program API if asked to submit.
Procedure
- Pull the program page. Write down asset types, wildcards, exclusions, and payout table. That note is evidence, not the finish.
- Enumerate in-scope hosts and apps (
NmapItonly against those assets, TransparentBrowser + Burp for web). - Map auth: register / login two roles. Save cookies or tokens.
- Hunt the usual bounty classes: IDOR, authz, OAuth mix-ups, SSRF, stored XSS, cache deception, business logic. Prefer Burp active scan on the mapped site map, then manual replay.
- Authz pass:
LifecycleAuthzReplay.start(har_path:, replay_as:, proxy:). - For each finding: minimal request/response pair, impact, CWE, fix hint.
- If asked to file:
PWN::Plugins::HackerOne(or the program's form) with that evidence. Close the browser when done.
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 · 71 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A bd5af21ac20e
bug-bounty-hunting is a skill published in the GitHub repository 0dayInc/pwn (82 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 744 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 skills, from other repositories
analyzing-linux-elf-malware
Analyze malicious Linux ELF binaries — botnets, cryptominers, ransomware, and rootkits targeting Linux servers, containers, and cloud infrastructure — through static analysis, dynamic tracing, and reverse engineering of x8664 and ARM samples. Use when investigating Linux malware, triaging a suspicious ELF binary…
osmedeus-expert
Expert guide for the Osmedeus security automation workflow engine. Use when: (1) writing or editing YAML workflows (modules and flows), (2) running osmedeus CLI commands (scan, workflow management, installation, server), (3) configuring steps, runners, triggers, or template variables, (4) debugging workflow execution…
performing-ai-assisted-vulnerability-discovery
Using LLMs to accelerate vulnerability research and pentest workflows — generating syntax-valid fuzzing seeds and evolving grammars, fine-tuned mutation dictionaries, parallel agent-based proof-of-vulnerability generation, and evidence-driven passive analysis of real HTTP traffic via the Burp MCP server. Covers…
performing-jwt-none-algorithm-attack
Execute and test the JWT none algorithm attack to bypass signature verification by manipulating the alg header field in JSON Web Tokens.
supabase
Supabase / PostgREST Row-Level-Security playbook — pull the anon (or leaked servicerole) key out of the frontend JS, map tables from the auto-generated OpenAPI spec, test anonymous RLS READ disclosures (PII/secret leaks), and anonymous RLS WRITE abuse (insert/update/delete — e.g. forging…
graphql
GraphQL pentest playbook — find the endpoint, dump the schema (introspection or field-suggestion fallback), then test for authorization gaps, query batching, alias overload, depth-based DoS, and SQLi/NoSQLi in resolver arguments. Use when the target exposes a /graphql endpoint, GraphiQL, Apollo, or accepts GraphQL…