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 agentmods add skills/emre-guler/websec/sstinpx skills add emre-guler/websec --skill sstigit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/emre-guler/websecWrote 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/emre-guler/websec/ssti)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/emre-guler/websec/ssti"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/emre-guler/websec/ssti.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00077 | $0.04961 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.02481 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00992 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00496 |
Grade A, and why
ssti 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 4d 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 — 155 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Server-Side Template Injection Detection
Overview
Server-side template injection happens when untrusted input becomes part of the template a server-side engine evaluates, rather than a value the template merely prints. Template engines are interpreters: they resolve expressions, traverse object graphs, call methods, and in most engines reach language builtins. When a handler concatenates a name, a subject line, or a stored snippet into the template source before rendering, the attacker's payload is executed on the server with the application's privileges. The attacker is anyone who can influence such a value — an anonymous visitor filling a form, a customer editing a profile, or a semi-trusted content editor supplying a snippet the platform never intended to be code. What they gain scales with the engine: at the top end, reflection or an operating-system handle reached through the object graph gives remote code execution; even in a restricted engine, the template context exposes configuration objects, secrets, environment values, and file access. This skill finds it by locating every render, compile, or evaluate call whose template argument is not a constant, checking each site in parallel, and merging the results into <output_dir>/ssti-results.md.
What it is NOT
- Cross-site scripting (
/websec:xss): the injected markup is executed by the browser, not by the server. Test: does the engine evaluate the payload as its own expression syntax, or does the payload reach the response as literal text that the browser then runs? If template syntax comes back unchanged and only HTML or script executes, it is XSS. Template injection often produces XSS as a lesser outcome; the root cause and fix still differ. - Client-side template evaluation (
/websec:dom-based): a front-end framework evaluating an expression in the page is a browser-side issue ending in DOM XSS, not server execution. Test: where does the evaluation happen? - Command injection (
/websec:os-command-injection): the payload is interpreted by a shell. Test: is the sink a render call or a process launch? A template that reaches a shell helper is both — classify the template sink here and note the chain. - Unsafe deserialization (
/websec:deserialization): execution comes from rebuilding an object graph from serialized bytes, with no template engine involved. - Path traversal (
/websec:path-traversal): a template name concatenated into a filesystem path that loads an arbitrary file is traversal; the same name resolving to an attacker-supplied template body is this class. Say which one the evidence supports. - Not a finding: a constant template rendered with untrusted values passed as context variables; a template chosen through a fixed map of allowed names; a static template file that merely prints a user's data; string formatting with no engine behind it; templates under version control that no request can alter.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 155 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 516a2fa58a3c
ssti is a skill published in the GitHub repository emre-guler/websec (2 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 4,961 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
ponytail-sec-audit
Full project security audit. Scans the entire codebase across three passes: code that shouldn't exist, all dependencies assessed, all hardening findings. Produces a comprehensive numbered report with blast-radius narrative. Persists findings to .ponytail-sec/ for cross-scan tracking. For per-diff review use…
ponytail-sec
Security companion for active development. Scopes to the current diff or changed files. Three passes: YAGNI code review, new-dep assessment, and up to 3 material hardening findings. Lean by design — surfaces the one thing to fix before merging, not a backlog. Use ponytail-sec-audit for a full project scan.
dockerfile
Binary Dockerfile image-build hardening check. Use when reviewing Dockerfiles, container image builds, multi-stage builds, runtime users, pinned bases, or reproducible dependency installs. Minimal output only: OK or NOTOK: RULE, RULE.
k8s-securitycontext
Binary Kubernetes securityContext hardening check. Use when reviewing Pods, Deployments, StatefulSets, DaemonSets, Jobs, CronJobs, Helm templates, or Kubernetes manifests that define containers. Minimal output only: OK or NOTOK: RULE, RULE.
Mixed-Language Monorepos
This skill should be used when the user is auditing a "polyglot monorepo", "multi-language codebase", "microservices with different languages", "Go + Python + TypeScript", or any codebase with services written in different programming languages. Provides strategies for cross-service security analysis and unified…
OWASP API Security Top 10
This skill should be used when the user asks about "API security", "OWASP API Top 10", "BOLA", "broken object level authorization", "API authentication", "mass assignment", "GraphQL security", "gRPC security", "rate limiting", "API abuse", "REST API vulnerabilities", or needs to identify API-specific security issues…