supply-chain-security
Skill0 starsChanged 41 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when designing or reviewing the artifact supply chain — SBOM generation, image signing, provenance/attestations, deploy-by-digest, and registry hygiene. Mention "supply chain", "sbom", "cosign", "sign images", "slsa", "deploy by digest" as triggers.
19 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- lza6/claw-code-tingfengtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Indium-AI-Labs/indium-agentkittheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- SwastikPandey1024/agentic-engineering-ostheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- Ionate-Technologies/indium-agentkittheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- lushun2014/lushibo-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- 2233admin/reverse-skill-evolvertheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use binary-diff, js-reverse and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
DorianGalloSkillbinary-diff
跨版本符号迁移与二进制差分。当你有旧版本的符号/逆向结果,需要快速迁移到新版本时使用。 适用场景:内核缺 PDB 用旧版符号推导、程序更新后批量迁移函数名、应用更新后快速定位新偏移。 核心方法:用 LLM 做结构化差异比对,程序化输入输出,成本极低(200 函数 ~1 元)。 触发关键词:符号迁移、bindiff、跨版本、PDB 缺失、函数偏移迁移、symbol migration、binary diff、版本对比。
Also in 7 projects that use this
DorianGalloSkilljs-reverse
Also in 7 projects that use this
Roshu18Skillpentest-tools
Tool selection policy for BearStrike based on target type, scan risk, and signal strength.
Also in 7 projects that use this
zhaoxuya520Skillbrowser-extension-reverse
Use for authorized reverse engineering of browser extensions (Chrome/Firefox) including manifest analysis, background workers, and extension-based credential or traffic logic recovery.
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +8 more from DorianGallo
Other versions19 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 19
- zhaoxuya520/reverse-skill-private★ 40ksame name
- zhaoxuya520/reverse-skill★ 38ksame name
- danielmeppiel/apm★ 4.2ksame name
- microsoft/apm★ 4.2ksame name
- microsoft/hve-core★ 1.6ksame name
- irahardianto/awesome-agv★ 157same name
- superagent-ai/skills★ 77same name
- z91772524-ai/pojia-next-mac★ 39same name
- 2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver★ 26same name
- Indium-AI-Labs/indium-agentkit★ 18same name
9 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 repository45 other files it gives its agents.
- admission-policy-reviewSkill
- alert-rule-reviewSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- argocd-applicationsetSkill
- argocd-debugSkill
- argocdSkill
- cert-manager-debugSkill
- cicd-reviewSkill
- cilium-debugSkill
- ciliumSkill
- cluster-backupSkill
- dast-reviewSkill
- dockerfile-reviewSkill
- english-technical-messageSkill
- git-messageSkill
- gitops-reviewSkill
- go-bugfixSkill
- go-code-reviewSkill
- go-testing-reviewSkill
- grafana-dashboardsSkill
- helm-reviewSkill
- homelab-change-planSkill
- incident-analysisSkill
- ingressSkill
- interview-system-designSkill
- istio-debugSkill
- istioSkill
- kubernetes-autoscalingSkill
- kubernetes-debugSkill
- kubernetes-securitySkill
- kubernetes-yaml-reviewSkill
- migration-planSkill
- observability-reviewSkill
- observability-stackSkill
- production-readinessSkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- root-cause-analysisSkill
- runbook-writerSkill
- runtime-security-reviewSkill
- secrets-managementSkill
- storage-debugSkill
- terraform-reviewSkill
- upgrade-readinessSkill
- vaultSkill
- vulnerability-triageSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 13 edited versions we read keep these.
5
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 18
Read the build workflow, registry references, signing settings, and deployment image ref.
- Distinctive: line 22
Do not treat a mutable tag as artifact identity.
- Distinctive: line 26
Follow the Workflow, Safety rules, and Quality checklist below.
- Distinctive: line 36
Use when reviewing or designing the path from build to running artifact: SBOM, CVE scanning placement, image signing and verification, …
- Distinctive: line 80
Never treat a signed image as "safe" — signing proves origin, not absence of vulnerabilities.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 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
Supply Chain Security
TL;DR checklist
- Trace the built image through SBOM, scan, signature, and provenance.
- Check digest binding and the deployment admission point.
- Identify which verification step would reject an unsigned or unexpected artifact.
Key read-only checks
- Read the build workflow, registry references, signing settings, and deployment image ref.
Common pitfalls
- Do not treat a mutable tag as artifact identity.
Agent procedure
Follow the Workflow, Safety rules, and Quality checklist below.
Quick references
- references/signing-attestation.md
Last verified: unverified
When to use
Use when reviewing or designing the path from build to running artifact: SBOM, CVE scanning
placement, image signing and verification, provenance, registry policy, and digest-pinned
deploys. Complements dockerfile-review (image contents), cicd-review (pipeline as attack
surface), and kubernetes-security (cluster side).
Goal
Make the deployed artifact traceable and verifiable end-to-end: know what was built, from what, by whom — and make the cluster refuse anything that can't prove it.
Workflow
- Inventory (SBOM) — SBOM generated at build time (
syft <image> -o cyclonedx-json), stored/attached as an attestation, not a CI log artifact that expires. SBOM from the built image beats SBOM from source (captures the base image and actual installed packages). - Scan — image CVE scan (
trivy image/grype) gates the pipeline; scanning the SBOM (grype sbom:./sbom.json) lets you re-scan cheaply when new CVEs publish — without rebuilding. Check that both moments exist: on push AND continuously against the registry. - Sign — every image pushed to a prod-reachable registry is signed (
cosign sign). Keyless (OIDC identity + Rekor transparency log) for public/CI builds; key-based (KMS) where keyless identity binding doesn't fit. Verify what the signature is bound to: the digest, never the tag. - Attest — SBOM and SLSA provenance attached as attestations (
cosign attest --predicate) so verification policy can require them, not just a bare signature. - Deploy by digest — the GitOps repo references
image@sha256:..., updated by the pipeline after sign/attest succeed. Tags are for humans; digests are for deploys. Check the whole chain: what the pipeline pushes = what git references = what admission verifies. - Registry as boundary — immutable tags enabled, push rights limited to CI identities (OIDC, not shared robot passwords), separate repos/paths for dev vs prod with promotion between them, retention that never deletes a digest currently referenced by git.
- Verify at admission — cluster enforces the policy: signature + required attestations +
allowed registry + digest-only. See
admission-policy-reviewfor the policy side. - Gap-check the story — walk one artifact backwards: running pod → digest → signature → provenance → source commit. Every broken link in that walk is a finding.
References
references/signing-attestation.md— cosign command patterns (keyless vs KMS), attestation predicate types, SLSA levels table, verification failure modes, and the digest-flow checklist.
Safety rules
- This is a design/review skill: do not push, sign, or delete registry artifacts, and do not create/rotate signing keys — propose commands for the user.
- Never treat a signed image as "safe" — signing proves origin, not absence of vulnerabilities; keep the scan gate independent of the signature gate.
- Key material and OIDC trust configs are secrets-adjacent: reference where they live, never inline values.
Output format
## Chain walk (pod → digest → signature → provenance → commit)
<which links exist, which are broken>
## Gaps by stage
- <stage> — <what's missing> — <risk> — <fix>
## Proposed pipeline additions
<concrete steps/commands, ordered, for user review>
## Verification policy requirements
<what admission should enforce once the chain exists>Quality checklist
- SBOM is generated from the built image and attached as an attestation
- Signatures are verified against digests, not tags
- The git → registry → admission digest chain was walked, not assumed
- Registry push rights and tag immutability were checked
- No artifact was pushed/signed/deleted by the agent
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.

