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 26zl/cybersec-toolkit --skill ctf-revgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/26zl/cybersec-toolkitWrote 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/26zl/cybersec-toolkit/ctf-rev)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/26zl/cybersec-toolkit/ctf-rev"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/26zl/cybersec-toolkit/ctf-rev/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/26zl/cybersec-toolkit/ctf-rev"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/26zl/cybersec-toolkit/ctf-rev.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00086 | $0.01048 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00419 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00210 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00105 |
Grade A, and why
ctf-rev 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 — 109 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CTF reverse engineering methodology
1. Triage
file ./bin
strings ./bin | head -50
strings ./bin | grep -i "flag\|ctf{\|password\|key"
xxd ./bin | head -20 # magic bytes
checksec --file=./bin # protections
2. Detect packing
# Entropy check (>7.5 = packed/encrypted)
ent ./bin # or: python3 -c "from collections import Counter; ..."
# UPX / known packers
upx -t ./bin # tests + identifies UPX
detect-it-easy-cli ./bin
diec ./bin
If UPX-packed: upx -d ./bin -o unpacked. For custom packers: dump from memory after unpacking stub runs (gdb / x64dbg).
3. Pick the decompiler
| Binary type | Best tool |
|---|---|
| ELF / PE / Mach-O | Ghidra (registry), IDA (commercial), Binary Ninja |
| Stripped ELF | Ghidra + recover symbols via FunctionID / Lumen |
| .NET (DLL/EXE) | dnSpyEx, ilspycmd, dotPeek |
| Java JAR | jadx, cfr, procyon |
| Java class | javap -c -p |
| Android APK | jadx-gui, apktool d then jadx on dex |
| iOS / Mach-O | Hopper, Ghidra |
| Go binary | redress, GoReSym, Ghidra + Go plugin |
| Rust | Ghidra + rustfilt for symbols |
| WASM | wabt (wasm-decompile), wasmer for run |
Python .pyc |
uncompyle6, decompyle3, pycdc |
| PyInstaller .exe | pyinstxtractor then pycdc on .pyc |
| Compiled Lua | unluac, luadec |
4. Dynamic analysis
# Trace
ltrace ./bin
strace ./bin
strace -f -e trace=read,write,open ./bin
# Debugger
gdb-multiarch ./bin
# pwndbg or gef extensions are loaded by default
# Fault injection / branch flipping
gdb> set $eax = 1 # change return value to bypass check
For Android: frida for runtime instrumentation, objection on top.
5. Anti-debug / anti-VM
Common checks:
ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME)returns -1 if already debugged → patch withnop/proc/self/statusTracerPid: 0check → LD_PRELOAD a fake or patch- timing checks (rdtsc) → patch
IsDebuggerPresent()(Windows) → patch the call site
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 · 109 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A bcb303573b9b
ctf-rev is a skill published in the GitHub repository 26zl/cybersec-toolkit (82 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 86 tokens to every session and 1,048 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
argus
Argus — the all-seeing scanner suite. Six automated scanners for high-value web + LLM bug classes — CORS misconfiguration (origin reflection / null / credentialed read), CRLF & host-header injection, NoSQL injection (operator auth-bypass / $where blind), JWT attacks (alg:none / RS256→HS256 confusion / secret crack)…
exploiting-format-string-vulnerabilities
Methodology for exploiting format string bugs where attacker-controlled data reaches the format argument of printf-family functions, enabling stack/memory disclosure (info leaks for ASLR/PIE/canary defeat) and arbitrary write primitives (%n) to hijack control flow via GOT/.finiarray overwrites.
exploiting-integer-overflow-vulnerabilities
Methodology for finding and exploiting integer overflow, underflow, truncation, and signedness bugs in native code during authorized engagements, focusing on how wrapped arithmetic in size/length calculations leads to undersized allocations, oversized copies, length-check bypasses, and downstream heap/stack overflows.
exploiting-linux-kernel-vulnerabilities
Methodology for discovering and exploiting Linux kernel memory-corruption vulnerabilities (UAF, OOB read/write, race/TOCTOU, type confusion) during authorized engagements, covering reachability analysis, building stable read/write primitives from a single bug, defeating KASLR/SMEP/SMAP/KPTI, slab/buddy heap grooming…
detecting-evasion-techniques-in-endpoint-logs
Detects defense evasion techniques used by adversaries in endpoint logs including log tampering, timestomping, process injection, and security tool disabling. Use when investigating suspicious endpoint behavior, building detection rules for evasion tactics, or conducting threat hunting for stealthy adversary activity.…
detecting-fileless-attacks-on-endpoints
Detects fileless malware and in-memory attacks that execute entirely in RAM without writing persistent files to disk, evading traditional antivirus. Use when building detections for PowerShell-based attacks, reflective DLL injection, WMI persistence, and registry-resident malware. Activates for requests involving…