agentleFS
aradmanamnaoonaradmanamnaoon/vibe-coding-skills/skills/security/authorization-boundary-auditor/SKILL.md

authorization-boundary-auditor

Skill0 starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub

Audit object, action, role, and tenant authorization boundaries after identity is established. Use for permissions, ownership, admin, organization, or multi-user features.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. About 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈9

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Read applicable repository instructions before edits.

    line 20
  2. Distinctive:

    Look for IDOR/object-ownership gaps, admin-only actions, tenant boundary leaks, and client-supplied role/owner fields.

    line 34
  3. Distinctive:

    Verify collection/list queries enforce the same scope as individual-object endpoints.

    line 35
  4. Distinctive:

    Test allowed and denied combinations using at least two ordinary users plus privileged roles where relevant.

    line 36
  5. Distinctive:

    Check background jobs, exports, websocket/subscription paths, and indirect endpoints that bypass the main handler.

    line 37
  6. Distinctive:

    Verify denial has no side effect and returns a non-sensitive response.

    line 38
  7. Distinctive:

    Never test against real users or production data without explicit authorization.

    line 46
  8. Distinctive:

    Every protected operation has an explicit policy path.

    line 50
  9. Distinctive:

    If business policy is ambiguous, identify the exact undecidable cases and do not invent permissions.

    line 63

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Purpose

Prevent horizontal and vertical privilege escalation.

When to activate

Code decides whether an authenticated identity may read/change a resource or perform an action.

When not to activate

The change only establishes identity and does not gate resources/actions.

Preconditions

  • Read applicable repository instructions before edits.
  • Preserve unrelated working-tree changes and establish a baseline when the workflow can modify code.
  • Identify which tools and environments are actually available; do not claim unavailable checks ran.

Required inputs

  • Permission model
  • Roles/tenants/ownership rules
  • Protected operations and data model

Workflow

  1. List protected resources/actions and the policy expected for each role or relationship.
  2. Trace each server-side entry point to an authorization decision made with authoritative resource data.
  3. Look for IDOR/object-ownership gaps, admin-only actions, tenant boundary leaks, and client-supplied role/owner fields.
  4. Verify collection/list queries enforce the same scope as individual-object endpoints.
  5. Test allowed and denied combinations using at least two ordinary users plus privileged roles where relevant.
  6. Check background jobs, exports, websocket/subscription paths, and indirect endpoints that bypass the main handler.
  7. Verify denial has no side effect and returns a non-sensitive response.

Relevant tools

Repository/data-model search, API/integration tests, policy engine if present.

Safety restrictions

Never test against real users or production data without explicit authorization.

Validation

  • Every protected operation has an explicit policy path.
  • Cross-user/cross-tenant denied cases are tested.
  • Client-controlled authorization fields cannot override authoritative policy.

Expected output

  • Authorization matrix
  • Entry-point mapping
  • Escalation findings
  • Executed allow/deny tests

Failure handling

If business policy is ambiguous, identify the exact undecidable cases and do not invent permissions.

Completion criteria

The skill is complete only when every applicable validation item above has observed evidence or is explicitly marked not executed with the concrete blocker. Do not replace missing evidence with confidence language.

Research mapping

This skill was selected from research problems: P015. See research/vibe-coding-problems.md and research/problem-evidence.csv in the Vibe Coding Skills repository.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.