Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to u9401066/rootcause-mcp. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/u9401066/rootcause-mcp/master/.claude/skills/security-reviewer/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/u9401066/rootcause-mcpWrote 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/u9401066/rootcause-mcp/security-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/u9401066/rootcause-mcp/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/u9401066/rootcause-mcp/security-reviewer/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/u9401066/rootcause-mcp/security-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/u9401066/rootcause-mcp/security-reviewer.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01909 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00955 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00382 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00191 |
Grade A, and why
security-reviewer scanned grade A with 1 finding 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
response = requests.get(user_provided_url) This is a copy
100% identical to security-reviewer — 0 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 — 271 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
安全性審查技能
描述
基於 OWASP Top 10 和安全最佳實踐,對程式碼進行安全性審查。
觸發條件
- 「安全檢查」「security review」「OWASP」
- 「漏洞掃描」「vulnerability scan」
- PR 審查時自動觸發安全檢查
🔒 OWASP Top 10 (2021) 檢查清單
A01: Broken Access Control(失效的存取控制)
檢查項目:
- 路徑遍歷 (Path Traversal)
- 未驗證的重導向
- IDOR (Insecure Direct Object Reference)
- 缺少存取控制檢查
# ❌ 不安全
@app.get("/files/{filename}")
def get_file(filename: str):
return open(f"/data/{filename}").read() # Path traversal!
# ✅ 安全
@app.get("/files/{file_id}")
def get_file(file_id: str, current_user: User = Depends(get_current_user)):
file = db.get_file(file_id)
if file.owner_id != current_user.id:
raise HTTPException(403)
return file.content
A02: Cryptographic Failures(加密機制失效)
檢查項目:
- 敏感資料明文傳輸
- 使用弱加密演算法 (MD5, SHA1)
- 密鑰硬編碼
- 不安全的隨機數生成
# ❌ 不安全
import hashlib
password_hash = hashlib.md5(password.encode()).hexdigest()
# ✅ 安全
from passlib.hash import bcrypt
password_hash = bcrypt.hash(password)
A03: Injection(注入攻擊)
檢查項目:
- SQL Injection
- Command Injection
- LDAP Injection
- XPath Injection
# ❌ SQL Injection
query = f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = {user_id}"
cursor.execute(query)
# ✅ 參數化查詢
cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ?", (user_id,))
A04: Insecure Design(不安全的設計)
檢查項目:
- 缺乏 rate limiting
- 缺乏業務邏輯驗證
- 不安全的密碼重設流程
A05: Security Misconfiguration(安全設定錯誤)
檢查項目:
- Debug 模式在 production 開啟
- 預設帳密未更改
- 不必要的功能啟用
- 錯誤訊息洩漏敏感資訊
# ❌ Production 不應該
app = FastAPI(debug=True)
# ✅ 從環境變數讀取
app = FastAPI(debug=os.getenv("DEBUG", "false").lower() == "true")
A06: Vulnerable Components(易受攻擊的元件)
檢查項目:
- 使用已知漏洞的套件版本
- 未定期更新依賴
- 使用不維護的套件
# 檢查已知漏洞
pip-audit
safety check
npm audit
A07: Authentication Failures(身分驗證失敗)
檢查項目:
- 弱密碼政策
- 暴力破解防護
- Session 管理不當
- 不安全的「記住我」實作
A08: Data Integrity Failures(資料完整性失敗)
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 · 271 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A bbd65b891475
security-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository u9401066/rootcause-mcp (0 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,909 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). It is 100% identical to security-reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review
Use before opening a pull request, marking one ready for review, or pushing further commits to a branch with an open pull request — or when asked to review a diff or a PR. Reviews the cumulative diff against the project's written commitments and reports evidence-grounded findings; works with any coding agent and needs…
ecosystem-tools
Third-party Claude Code token/context/code-review tools. Use when choosing or recommending an external tool to reduce token usage, manage context, or review large codebases (caveman, code-review-graph, token-savior, context-mode...).
git-workflow
Git workflow and conventional commits. Use when working with git, branches, commits, pull requests, code review, or version control strategy.
solid-principles
SOLID principles for object-oriented design. Use when reviewing code quality, refactoring, designing classes or interfaces, or discussing architecture patterns.
kiss-dry-yagni
Principes KISS, DRY, YAGNI. Use when reviewing code quality or refactoring.
reviewing-update-sets
Reviewing, analyzing, and comparing ServiceNow update sets before promotion. Shows changes, risks, dependencies, and conflicts. Use when the user mentions update sets, customizations, promotion, code review, change tracking, pre-deployment review, sysupdatexml, customer updates, "what changed in this update set," or…