pentest
Skill159 starsChanged 52 days agoMITView on GitHub
Supervised authorized pentest: scope, route, validate, report.
13 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- victorbeppler/claude-bootstraptheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- julianosirtori/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- LuisSambrano/antigravity-configtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- g-cqd/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- greglas75/zuvotheir own version, first seen Oct 16, 2026
- harshitsharma0701/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
Other versions13 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 13
- zakirkun/deep-eye★ 2.3ksame name
- JoelQ/skills★ 44same name
- us/shannon-on-claude-code★ 15same name
- ariadoss/superskills★ 12same name
- LuisSambrano/antigravity-config★ 8same name
- greglas75/zuvo★ 7same name
- gonimar/claude-web-studio★ 4same name
- g-cqd/skills★ 2same name
- Digital-Frontier-LDA/shannon-claude-code★ 1same name
- leonardoaraujosantos/my_ai_skills★ 1same name
3 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- api-testingSkill
- business-logicSkill
- identity-authSkill
- llm-securitySkill
- misconfigSkill
- web-appSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 10 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
10
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 22
Test only an approved scope.
- Very specific: line 28
Do not close an engagement without reporting/report.md and retrospective/retrospective.md.
- Very specific: line 41
Every validated hypothesis becomes a finding: Before REPORTING, walk hypotheses.md and confirm each Validated hypothesis has a …
- Distinctive: line 58
Keep tool summaries to five lines or fewer: result, evidence path, and next validated action.
- Very specific: line 63
Keep batch summaries to 3-5 bullets.
- Very specific: line 80
Bind: Use violin_record_ptt to set one active task and skill.
- Very specific: line 83
Discover: Use playbooks/recon.md, inventory routes, methods, parameters, roles, sessions, and application bundles.
- Very specific: line 86
Research: Use playbooks/vuln-research.md, record each candidate in hypotheses.md, and route its class using the table below.
- Very specific: line 88
Validate: Use playbooks/exploitation.md plus the matched specialist playbook.
- Distinctive: line 91
Record immediately: After every reviewed batch, update the hypothesis, coverage cell, and PTT.
- Very specific: line 93
Report and improve: Use playbooks/reporting.md, then read references/retrospective.md and record gaps without rewriting history.
- Very specific: line 96
If a command fails twice, stop and read references/anti-stuck.md.
- Distinctive: line 137
Prove the claim before marking it Validated: Read the saved request and response, identify the expected secure behavior, and check that the …
- Distinctive: line 142
If the evidence is inconclusive, keep the hypothesis Candidate and run one bounded discriminating probe in the appropriate testing phase, …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Pentest Orchestrator
The authoritative engagement lifecycle and skill router. It does not contain vulnerability payloads or tool matrices: load the matched phase playbook and specialist skill on demand.
Non-Negotiable Contract
- Test only an approved scope. Target-touching work uses
violin_execorviolin_exec_burst; host-local preparation may useterminal. - Maintain exactly one active
[~]PTT task. Keep structured hypotheses, evidence, coverage, and phase state under$ENG_DIR. - Store raw proof only under
$ENG_DIR/evidence/<phase>/; never store secrets or evidence inskills/or$ENG_DIR/state/. - Do not close an engagement without
reporting/report.mdandretrospective/retrospective.md. - One finding per vulnerability — never bundle. Each distinct
vulnerability (a separate flaw, endpoint, or attack class) gets its own
violin_submit_findingcall. If one probe exposed two flaws (e.g. a JWT algorithm bypass AND a separate missing-access-control on an admin route), submit two findings, each naming its own decisive receipts and saved bodies. Bundling unrelated flaws under one finding blurs severity, remediation, and traceability — each report entry must stand alone and be independently attributable to one flaw. - Do not stop at the first confirmed finding. Sweep every in-scope obligation until it is tested, not-applicable, or blocked with evidence. A partial pass that leaves obligations untested is an incomplete assessment.
- Every validated hypothesis becomes a finding. Before REPORTING, walk
hypotheses.mdand confirm eachValidatedhypothesis has a corresponding submitted finding. A validated flaw with no finding is a missed submission.
Load on Demand
| Need | Read |
| Scope, stop conditions, safety | references/shared-safety.md and .hermes.md |
| Evidence, confidence, CVSS | references/standards.md and references/evidence-and-verification-discipline.md |
| Exhaustive coverage matrix | references/exhaustive-coverage.md |
| Pre-REPORTING common-class sweep | references/coverage-closeout.md |
| Methodology gates (close-gate checklist) | state/methodology-gates.yaml (dispositioned in VULN_RESEARCH) |
| Repeated failure or stalled research | references/anti-stuck.md |
| Platform, delegation, tool fallback | references/platform-delegation.md |
| CVE and public vulnerability research | references/cve-apis.md |
Keep tool summaries to five lines or fewer: result, evidence path, and next validated action. Redact credentials and tokens in chat and state artifacts.
Output Budget
Keep batch summaries to 3-5 bullets. Save raw output strictly under
$ENG_DIR/evidence/<phase>/; do not paste full scanner output into chat, quote only decisive lines. Never summarize away evidence needed for validation: preserve full output, command, timestamp, and artifact path in the saved file.
State & Context Continuity
On every phase change, write $ENG_DIR/state/phase-summary.md and update
$ENG_DIR/state/checkpoint.json (phase_current, open_items). If context is
at risk of compression, tell the user: "Continue in the current session; I will
resume from $ENG_DIR/state/ files." Re-read $ENG_DIR/state/checkpoint.json,
$ENG_DIR/state/ptt.md, and $ENG_DIR/state/phase-summary.md before the next
action. Do not reconstruct tested state from memory after compression.
Engagement Loop
- Bootstrap: Confirm
$ENG_DIR/scope/scope.yamland the engagement state are valid. In interactive mode, useplaybooks/scoping.md; in non-interactive mode, do not callclarify. - Bind: Use
violin_record_pttto set one active task and skill. If it returnsskill_prepared, load the delivered skill, then repeat the identical call; the PTT transition is applied only after the second call returnsok. - Discover: Use
playbooks/recon.md, inventory routes, methods, parameters, roles, sessions, and application bundles. Start the coverage matrix instate/coverage-matrix.yaml. - Research: Use
playbooks/vuln-research.md, record each candidate inhypotheses.md, and route its class using the table below. - Validate: Use
playbooks/exploitation.mdplus the matched specialist playbook. Capture baseline and decisive differential evidence through the guarded execution tools; callviolin_review_batchafter each batch. - Record immediately: After every reviewed batch, update the hypothesis, coverage cell, and PTT. A missing state record is not a completed result.
- Report and improve: Use
playbooks/reporting.md, then readreferences/retrospective.mdand record gaps without rewriting history.
If a command fails twice, stop and read references/anti-stuck.md. If batch
state is desynchronized, use violin_rebind_pending_batch before new work.
Phase Playbooks
| Phase | Playbook |
| Scoping | playbooks/scoping.md |
| Reconnaissance | playbooks/recon.md |
| Vulnerability Research | playbooks/vuln-research.md |
| Exploitation | playbooks/exploitation.md |
| Post-Exploitation | playbooks/post-exploitation.md |
| Reporting | playbooks/reporting.md |
| Tools and environment | playbooks/tools.md |
Vulnerability Routing
vuln_class takes priority over candidate_source, which takes priority over
the phase default. Load only the selected specialist skill and its matching
playbook.
| Class | Routed skill |
| SQLi, XSS, command injection, SSRF, traversal, LDAP, XPath, NoSQL, SSTI, XXE, deserialization, prototype pollution | web-app |
| Authentication, authorization, IDOR, JWT, CSRF, redirects, cryptography | identity-auth |
| REST, SOAP, GraphQL, WebSocket | api-testing |
| LLM prompt injection, MCP / JSON-RPC | llm-security |
| Workflow, pricing, coupon, quota, referral, race condition | business-logic |
| Misconfiguration, error handling, observability, obscurity | misconfig |
| Domain or public-record research | domain-intel or osint-investigation |
| Repository/source/static analysis | oss-forensics, audit-context-building, semgrep, codeql, or sarif-parsing |
Evidence Minimum
Submit a finding through violin_submit_finding only after reviewing the signed
execution receipts and saved evidence that demonstrate its claim. Capture the
full HTTP status, headers, and body when HTTP is involved. Compare appropriate
unauthenticated, low-privilege, and authorized contexts for identity-related
findings. The guard assigns the finding ID and stores the typed record; do not
write finding Markdown by hand.
- Prove the claim before marking it Validated. Read the saved request and response, identify the expected secure behavior, and check that the observed result demonstrates the claimed impact. Use relevant comparison controls (identity, privilege, ownership, or a negative input) to rule out ordinary behavior. A successful request or an interesting response alone is not proof. If the evidence is inconclusive, keep the hypothesis Candidate and run one bounded discriminating probe in the appropriate testing phase, or escalate the unresolved limitation; do not relabel it merely to complete closeout.
- Submission acceptance is not semantic validation.
receipt_validationverifies authenticity.evidence_completereports the HTTP-byte warning heuristic; eventruedoes not establish vulnerability proof. A stored finding'svalidatedstatus is not an independent review of the claim. Resolve proof warnings and inspect the cited bodies before closing the task. - Save the decisive body, then cite it. Save the decisive request/response
body to its own file under
evidence/(e.g.curl -i -o evidence/vuln-research/<vector>.txt ...). Declare that exact path through theviolin_execcall'sevidence_outputs, then pass it asevidence_pathsalongsidereceipt_pathswhen submitting the finding. Undeclared files are not authenticated by the signed receipt and cannot support a finding. - One finding per obligation. Submit a separate finding for each distinct vulnerability. If one probe spans multiple flaws, split it into one finding each instead of a single bundled finding. Do not submit a placeholder without a real signed receipt and a saved evidence body.
- Do not stop at the first finding. Sweep every in-scope obligation; a partial pass that leaves obligations untested is an incomplete assessment. Record each obligation as tested, not-applicable, or blocked with evidence — silence is not coverage.
Completion Checklist
- Scope and authorization are current.
- Every coverage cell is tested, not applicable, or blocked with a reason.
- Before REPORTING: sweep
references/coverage-closeout.mdand record negatives explicitly (silence is not coverage). - Before REPORTING: review each claim against its saved decisive evidence and relevant controls; resolve or escalate inconclusive hypotheses.
- Every validated vulnerability has a receipt-backed finding submission.
- All command batches are reviewed and state files are current.
- Reporting and retrospective artifacts exist.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

