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 meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack --skill analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsfgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-packWrote 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/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsf)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsf"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsf/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/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsf"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack/analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsf.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 | $0.00090 | $0.00827 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00045 | $0.00413 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00165 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00083 |
Grade A, and why
analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsf 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 9d 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 — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyzing Malicious VBScript and WSF
When to Use
- You have a
.vbs,.wsf, or.htadelivered via phishing and need its real behavior. - You must decode
VBScript.Encode-obfuscated script (the#@~^marker) or string obfuscation. - You are identifying WScript.Shell/ActiveX-based dropper actions and IOCs.
Do not use wscript/cscript/mshta to run the script for analysis — that executes the
dropper. Decode and read it statically.
Prerequisites
- A static decoder (Python) or a script sandbox; the sample handled inertly in the lab.
Safety & Handling
- Never run the script with Windows Script Host (
wscript/cscript/mshta). - Defang recovered URLs; store dropped payloads password-protected.
Workflow
Step 1: Parse the container
For WSF, parse the XML <job>/<script> elements (a WSF can bundle multiple languages). For HTA,
separate the HTML wrapper from the <script> body.
python scripts/analyst.py analyze sample.wsf
Step 2: Decode VBScript.Encode
If you see the #@~^ header, decode the Microsoft Script Encoder stream back to source.
Step 3: Unroll string obfuscation
Resolve Chr()/Asc() builds, string concatenation, and Replace()-based deobfuscators to
reveal commands and URLs.
Step 4: Identify dropper actions and IOCs
Find CreateObject("WScript.Shell"), Run/Exec, ADODB/MSXML download patterns, and PowerShell
hand-offs; recover URLs/paths, defang, and route payloads onward.
Validation
- WSF/HTA containers are decomposed into their script bodies (all jobs/languages).
VBScript.Encodestreams are decoded to readable source.- Dropper actions and IOCs are recovered without executing the script.
Pitfalls
- Executing with
wscript/mshtato "see" behavior, infecting the host. - Missing one
<script>block in a multi-job WSF. - Overlooking the
#@~^encoded section and analyzing only the cleartext stub.
References
- See
references/api-reference.mdfor the WSF/VBScript decoder. - Windows Script Host docs and the Script Encoder format (linked in frontmatter).
What ships with it
3 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 92 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A bac9d14e8e96
analyzing-malicious-vbscript-and-wsf is a skill published in the GitHub repository meltedinhex/analyst-ai-pack (22 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 827 once invoked, about $0.0005 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-golang-malware-with-ghidra
Reverse engineer Go-compiled malware in Ghidra by parsing Go buildinfo and pclntab structures, recovering stripped/obfuscated function names (e.g. via GoResolver), and extracting embedded module/dependency strings and types from Go binaries. Use when analyzing a Go-language malware sample, deobfuscating a…
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects. Use when triaging a suspicious PDF attachment from a phishing email, analyzing a PDF-based exploit document, or building detection signatures for weaponized PDF…
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
A Chinese-language skill for examining suspicious PDF files with peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser. It is intended for static malware analysis, which studies a file without running it.
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects.
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects.
analyzing-malicious-pdf-with-peepdf
Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects.