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 UnboundCompute/security-agent-skills --skill hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injectiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/UnboundCompute/security-agent-skillsWrote 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/unboundcompute/security-agent-skills/hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injection)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/unboundcompute/security-agent-skills/hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injection"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/unboundcompute/security-agent-skills/hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injection/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/unboundcompute/security-agent-skills/hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injection"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/unboundcompute/security-agent-skills/hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injection.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 | $0.00173 | $0.02027 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00069 | $0.00811 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00405 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00203 |
Grade A, and why
hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injection 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 1mo 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 — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Hunting blind and second-order SQL injection: the paths first-order testing walks past
Parameterized queries have made obvious SQL injection rare, but two variants survive because they defeat the usual way people test. Blind injection reaches a real query, but the response returns no error and no data, so a single probe looks inert; the vulnerability is real and confirmable only through an inferential channel, a boolean that flips the response or a deliberate time delay. Second-order injection is subtler: the input is stored correctly and safely on the request that accepts it, then read back later and concatenated into a query on an entirely different code path, so the endpoint that accepts the payload is not the endpoint that is vulnerable. You find both by following stored values to their later query uses and by treating no-output sinks as blind rather than safe.
When to use
- A value is stored on one request and later used to build a query on a different code path.
- A parameter reaches a query whose response shows no error and no returned data.
- Data read back from the database, a cache, a log, or a queue is concatenated into a later query.
Scope check
Test SQL injection only against databases and applications you own or are authorized to assess, on non-production data. A confirming boolean or timing probe still executes against the database and a destructive payload must never be used, so stay inside the authorized boundary. If you can't name the authorization, stop.
The loop
-
Establish every query sink, including the silent ones. Inventory all query construction, and mark the sinks whose responses reveal nothing: background jobs, count-only checks, existence probes, and endpoints that return a fixed status regardless of the row. This is the false-positive killer in reverse: a silent sink is not a safe sink, it is a blind one, and it must be tested inferentially rather than dismissed. Name all sinks, silent ones included.
-
Follow stored values to their later query uses. For second-order injection, trace each value from the request that stores it to every later read: a profile field, a name, a comment, a cached lookup, a log line re-parsed by a job. At each later read, ask whether the value is concatenated into a query or bound as a parameter. The storing request being safe tells you nothing about the using request.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 134 lines · 173 tokens per session scan A 84ad4239a1f8
hunting-blind-and-second-order-sql-injection is a skill published in the GitHub repository UnboundCompute/security-agent-skills (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 173 tokens to every session and 2,027 once invoked, about $0.0007 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-05.
Other skills, from other repositories
prodcheck-review
Review this codebase against the prodcheck pre-production checklists — security, performance, scale, integrations, post-launch readiness and people. Use when asked to check whether a project is ready to ship, to audit an area before launch, or to work through a specific checklist. Produces evidence with file:line…
integrate-arcjet-guard-genkit
Integrate Arcjet security into a Genkit JS agent using @arcjet/guard — wrap ai.defineTool, put guardMiddleware on generate({ use }) for unwrapped / MCP / filesystem tools, and read a caller-owned id from generate({ context }). Use when asked to add Arcjet to genkit, rate limit its tools, screen inbound messages, or…
integrate-arcjet-guard-tanstack-ai
Integrate Arcjet security into a TanStack AI chat() app using @arcjet/guard — put guardMiddleware first on chat({ middleware }) so onBeforeToolCall gates tools, and read a caller-owned id from chat({ context }). Use when asked to add Arcjet to TanStack AI, rate limit its tools, screen inbound messages, or block prompt…
integrate-arcjet-guard-claude-managed-agents
Integrate Arcjet security into Claude Managed Agents (hosted REST+SSE, beta managed-agents-2026-04-01) using @arcjet/guard — screen user.message / initialevents before sessions.events.send, and gate custom tools on agent.customtooluse. Use when asked to add Arcjet to Claude Managed Agents, rate limit custom tools, or…
linear-claude-skill
Manage Linear issues, projects, and teams.
varlock-claude-skill
Secure environment variable management ensuring secrets are never exposed in Claude sessions, terminals, logs, or git commits.