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 ByamB4/find-cve-agent --skill cross-pollinationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ByamB4/find-cve-agentWrote 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/byamb4/find-cve-agent/cross-pollination)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/byamb4/find-cve-agent/cross-pollination"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/byamb4/find-cve-agent/cross-pollination/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/byamb4/find-cve-agent/cross-pollination"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/byamb4/find-cve-agent/cross-pollination.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 | $0.00033 | $0.01109 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00554 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00222 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00111 |
Grade A, and why
cross-pollination 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 10d 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 — 146 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Cross-Pollination -- Multiplying Findings
When to Use
After confirming a vulnerability in package-A, use this technique to find the same vulnerable pattern in packages B through Z. One finding can multiply into 5-20 findings.
The Multiplier Effect
| Starting Finding | Pattern | Typical Yield |
|---|---|---|
| Entity expansion in XML parser A | All XML parsers with no entity limit | 3-8 findings |
| Zip Slip in archive lib A | All archive extraction libs | 2-5 findings |
| Proto pollution in merge lib A | All deep merge/clone libs | 5-10 findings |
| ReDoS in validator A | All validators using same regex pattern | 3-7 findings |
| Code injection in schema validator A | All schema validators with code gen | 2-5 findings |
| Recursion DoS in serializer A | All recursive serializers | 5-15 findings |
| Method clobbering in parser A | All parsers creating objects from input | 3-8 findings |
Process
Step 1: Confirm the Original Finding
Before cross-pollinating, ensure the original finding is confirmed:
- PoC works
- fp-check passes
- Submitted or ready to submit
Step 2: Extract the Vulnerable Pattern
Identify the core vulnerable code pattern as a regex:
# Example: recursive function without depth limit
Pattern: function\s+\w+\(.*\)\s*\{.*\w+\( (self-call without depth check)
# Example: new Function with template literal
Pattern: new\s+Function\s*\(.*\$\{
# Example: path.join without startsWith check
Pattern: path\.join\(.*req\.(params|body|query)
Step 3: Search via grep.app
https://grep.app/search?q=PATTERN®exp=true&filter[lang][0]=JavaScript
Tips:
- Start with a specific pattern, then broaden if too few results
- Filter by language to reduce noise
- Look at file context, not just the matching line
- Skip node_modules, test files, documentation
Step 4: Evaluate Each Match
For each match:
- Is this a different package? (not a fork/copy of the original)
- Does user input reach this code? (trace the data flow)
- Is the pattern actually vulnerable in this context? (check for mitigations)
- Does the package have enough usage to warrant a CVE? (check downloads)
- Does a CVE already exist for this package? (check NVD)
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 146 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 22692d444fc0
cross-pollination is a skill published in the GitHub repository ByamB4/find-cve-agent (48 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,109 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
wordpress-plugin-hunt
Hunt WP plugins via REST, exploit CVEs when version known.
deep-invade
Deep pentest WP: SSRF, plugin CVE, JS mine, port scan chain.
zimbra-attack
Zimbra SOAP user enum, CVE-2022-37042, SSRF when webmail.
wp-plugin-cve-hunt
Systematic approach to finding and testing CVEs for identified WordPress plugins. Covers plugin discovery, version extraction from multiple sources (readme.txt, assets, inline JS), CVE database cross-referencing with WPScan/Patchstack/NVD/NVD API, version-based vulnerability matching, exploitation PoC generation, and…
analyzing-sbom-for-supply-chain-vulnerabilities
Parses Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) in CycloneDX and SPDX JSON formats to identify supply chain vulnerabilities by correlating components against the NVD CVE database via the NVD 2.0 API. Builds dependency graphs, calculates risk scores, identifies transitive vulnerability paths, and generates compliance reports.…
bug-bounty-hunting
Hunt vulnerabilities like an expert, not a linear software engineer: come at a target from the overlooked angle, reason by analogy and transfer proven attack mechanisms, attack the hidden assumptions and the seams between systems, drill to the mechanism, then keep it honest with proof and persistence (acceptance !=…