SKILL.md

/security - Security Audit Workflow

Dedicated security analysis for sensitive code.

When to Use

"Security audit"

"Check for vulnerabilities"

"Is this secure?"

"Review authentication code"

"Check for injection attacks"

Before handling auth, payments, user data

After adding security-sensitive features

Workflow Overview

┌─────────┐    ┌───────────┐

│  aegis  │───▶│ arbiter  │

│         │    │           │

└─────────┘    └───────────┘

  Security       Verify

  audit          fixes

Agent Sequence

Agent

Role

Output

aegis

Comprehensive security scan

Vulnerability report

arbiter

Verify fixes, run security tests

Verification report

Why Dedicated Security?

The /review workflow focuses on code quality. Security needs:

Specialized vulnerability patterns

Dependency scanning

Secret detection

OWASP Top 10 checks

Authentication/authorization review

Execution

Phase 1: Security Audit

Task(

  subagent_type="aegis",

  prompt="""

  Security audit: [SCOPE]

  Scan for:

  **Injection Attacks:**

  - SQL injection

  - Command injection

  - XSS (Cross-Site Scripting)

  - LDAP injection

  **Authentication/Authorization:**

  - Broken authentication

  - Session management issues

  - Privilege escalation

  - Insecure direct object references

  **Data Protection:**

  - Sensitive data exposure

  - Hardcoded secrets/credentials

  - Insecure cryptography

  - Missing encryption

  **Configuration:**

  - Security misconfigurations

  - Default credentials

  - Verbose error messages

  - Missing security headers

  **Dependencies:**

  - Known vulnerable packages

  - Outdated dependencies

  - Supply chain risks

  Output: Detailed report with:

  - Severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)

  - Location (file:line)

  - Description

  - Remediation steps

  """

)

Phase 2: Verification (After Fixes)

Task(

  subagent_type="arbiter",

  prompt="""

  Verify security fixes: [SCOPE]

  Run:

  - Security-focused tests

  - Dependency audit (npm audit, pip audit)

  - Re-check reported vulnerabilities

  - Verify fixes don't introduce regressions

  Output: Verification report

  """

)

Security Scopes

Full Codebase

User: /security

→ Scan entire codebase

Specific Area

User: /security authentication

→ Focus on auth-related code

Single File

User: /security src/api/auth.py

→ Deep dive on one file

Dependencies Only

User: /security --deps

→ Only dependency vulnerabilities

Example

User: /security the payment processing code

Claude: Starting /security audit for payment code...

Phase 1: Security audit...

[Spawns aegis]

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐

│ Security Audit Report                                       │

├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤

│ Scope: src/services/payment/                                │

│ Files scanned: 12                                           │

│ Lines analyzed: 2,847                                       │

├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤

│ CRITICAL (1)                                                │

│ ──────────                                                  │

│ [C1] SQL Injection in payment.py:89                         │

│      query = f"SELECT * FROM orders WHERE id = {order_id}"  │

│      Fix: Use parameterized queries                         │

│                                                             │

│ HIGH (2)                                                    │

│ ────────                                                    │

│ [H1] Hardcoded API key in stripe_client.py:12               │

│      STRIPE_KEY = "sk_live_..."                             │

│      Fix: Move to environment variable                      │

│                                                             │

│ [H2] Missing input validation in refund.py:45               │

│      amount = request.json['amount']  # No validation       │

│      Fix: Validate amount is positive number                │

│                                                             │

│ MEDIUM (1)                                                  │

│ ──────────                                                  │

│ [M1] Verbose error messages in error_handler.py:23          │

│      return {"error": str(e)}  # Leaks internal details     │

│      Fix: Return generic message, log details internally    │

│                                                             │

│ LOW (0)                                                     │

│ ───────                                                     │

│ None                                                        │

├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤

│ Summary: 1 critical, 2 high, 1 medium, 0 low                │

│ Status: BLOCKING - Fix critical issues before release       │

└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Fix the critical and high issues, then run:

/security --verify

After Fixes

User: /security --verify

Claude: Phase 2: Verifying fixes...

[Spawns arbiter]

✅ C1: SQL injection fixed - using parameterized queries

✅ H1: API key moved to environment variable

✅ H2: Input validation added

✅ M1: Error messages sanitized

All security tests passing.

Security audit: PASSED

OWASP Top 10 Coverage

Risk

Checked

A01 Broken Access Control

✅

A02 Cryptographic Failures

✅

A03 Injection

✅

A04 Insecure Design

✅

A05 Security Misconfiguration

✅

A06 Vulnerable Components

✅

A07 Auth Failures

✅

A08 Data Integrity Failures

✅

A09 Logging Failures

✅

A10 SSRF

✅

Flags

--deps: Dependencies only

--verify: Re-run after fixes

--owasp: Explicit OWASP Top 10 report

--secrets: Focus on secret detection

security