security-review-cn

Reviews code for security vulnerabilities by tracing untrusted input across trust boundaries.

96|8|Updated Aug 13, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/pingfanfan/hello-dsh --skill security-review-cn-pingfanfan
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: security-review-cn
Source: https://github.com/pingfanfan/hello-dsh/tree/main/examples/skills/security-review-cn
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/pingfanfan/hello-dsh --skill security-review-cn-pingfanfan

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Security reviews often devolve into generic OWASP checklists that miss real, exploitable issues in the actual code. This Skill structures a review around trust boundaries—where external data enters, where it flows, and where it gets treated as trusted—so findings are concrete and exploitable rather than theoretical. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Trust-Boundary-First Method: Enumerates all external inputs (HTTP requests, files, environment variables, database rows, third-party API responses, and model outputs) and traces them to dangerous sinks like shell commands, file paths, SQL, HTML templates, regex, deserialization, and redirects. - Credential and Permission Auditing: Checks for secrets leaking into logs, error messages, URLs, and diagnostic exports, and verifies authorization is enforced at the execution layer with default-deny and horizontal access control. - Sandbox vs. Access Control Clarity: Distinguishes language-level capability control from true isolation, which matters for agent systems running untrusted code. - Use Case: Before merging a pull request that adds a file-upload endpoint, run this review to trace the uploaded filename into shell commands and path joins, catching command injection and path traversal before deployment. ## Quick Start Ask the AI to perform a security review of the current codebase using the trust-boundary method and report findings ranked by exploitability.

Frequently Asked Questions about security-review-cn

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I do a security code review for injection vulnerabilities?▼

Start by listing every external input source, then trace each one to sinks like shell commands, SQL queries, file paths, and HTML output. Check whether values are concatenated as strings or passed through parameterized APIs such as execFile with array arguments.

What should a security review check beyond OWASP checklists?▼

Focus on trust boundaries in the actual code: where untrusted data becomes trusted. Verify credential handling in logs and error messages, authorization at the execution layer rather than the UI, and whether model outputs are treated as untrusted input.

Why is model output considered untrusted in agent systems?▼

Model output frequently gets concatenated into shell commands, file paths, SQL, or HTML, making it equivalent to user input. If an attacker can influence the prompt or context, the model's output becomes an injection vector and must be validated like any external data.

Does language-level access control replace sandboxing for untrusted code?▼

No. Language-level capability control only constrains code that follows the rules; untrusted code with host runtime access can bypass it entirely. True isolation requires external mechanisms such as separate processes, restricted runtimes, containers, or virtualization.

How should security review findings be reported?▼

Rank findings by exploitability rather than theoretical severity, and include a concrete exploitation path for each issue. Items without a demonstrable attack path should be labeled as suggestions, not vulnerabilities, and reports should avoid publishing ready-to-use attack payloads.