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 MingyiSecLab/Mingyi-Atlas --skill flash-loangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MingyiSecLab/Mingyi-AtlasWrote 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/mingyiseclab/mingyi-atlas/flash-loan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mingyiseclab/mingyi-atlas/flash-loan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mingyiseclab/mingyi-atlas/flash-loan/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/mingyiseclab/mingyi-atlas/flash-loan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mingyiseclab/mingyi-atlas/flash-loan.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 | $0.00027 | $0.01870 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00935 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00374 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00187 |
Grade A, and why
flash-loan 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 8d 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.
This is a copy
97% identical to flash-loan — 3 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 192 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Flash Loan Attack Playbook
Flash loans give the attacker uncollateralized capital for a single transaction. They're not vulnerabilities themselves — they're a force multiplier for existing bugs. Sources: Aave, Balancer, Uniswap V2/V3, Maker, dYdX (deprecated).
Common attack patterns
1. Oracle amplification (most common)
Use loan to push a price, then trigger price-dependent action.
Cross-reference: see oracle-manipulation/SKILL.md.
2. Unauthenticated callback handler
function executeOperation(
address[] calldata assets,
uint256[] calldata amounts,
uint256[] calldata premiums,
address initiator, // ← UNVALIDATED in many contracts
bytes calldata params
) external returns (bool) {
// Anyone can call this with fake `initiator`
// and have the contract do whatever the params say
}
Bug: initiator and msg.sender == pool checks are missing.
Attack: call executeOperation directly with no actual loan, malicious params → contract does the operation anyway.
3. Governance attack via flash loan
// Vulnerable governance:
function propose() external {
require(getVotes(msg.sender) > THRESHOLD);
// ...
}
function getVotes(address user) public view returns (uint256) {
return token.balanceOf(user); // ← reads SPOT balance, not snapshot
}
Attack: flash-loan governance tokens, propose malicious change (e.g., upgrade contract to drain), vote with the loaned tokens, execute, repay loan. MakerDAO had this pattern; mitigated by checkpoint-based voting.
4. Liquidity manipulation
Pool that uses totalSupply() or balanceOf(pool) for share math:
function deposit(uint256 amt) external {
uint256 shares = (amt * totalSupply()) / underlying.balanceOf(address(this));
_mint(msg.sender, shares);
underlying.transferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), amt);
}
Attacker:
- Flash-loan and deposit (becomes 99% of pool)
- Donate underlying to inflate
underlying.balanceOfartificially - Next depositor's shares =
amt * totalSupply / inflatedBalance≈ 0 - Withdraw → drain
This is the ERC4626 inflation attack (also covered in
reentrancy/overlap).
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 192 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 81f6c7b1217a
flash-loan is a skill published in the GitHub repository MingyiSecLab/Mingyi-Atlas (11 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 1,870 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to flash-loan, differing in 3 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
cis-aws-foundations-6.5
Ensure the default security group of every VPC restricts all traffic.
cis-aws-foundations-2.1.3
Ensure Organizations management account is not used for workloads.
cis-aws-foundations-2.12
Ensure access keys are rotated every 90 days or less.
cis-aws-foundations-2.5
Ensure MFA is enabled for the 'root' user account.
cis-aws-foundations-2.7
Eliminate use of the 'root' user for administrative and daily tasks.
cis-aws-foundations-4.4
Ensure that server access logging is enabled on the CloudTrail S3 bucket.