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

security-misconfiguration-auditor

Skill0 starsChanged 18 days agoMITView on GitHub

Inspect runtime, web, container, and deployment configuration for unsafe production defaults. Use before release or when CORS, cookies, debug mode, network exposure, TLS, or headers change.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    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:

    Check debug/dev modes, wildcard CORS, cookie/session flags, TLS assumptions, exposed admin/metrics ports, default credentials, verbose …

    line 33
  3. Distinctive:

    Check secrets are references/variables rather than committed values.

    line 35
  4. Distinctive:

    Verify fail-closed behavior for missing security-critical configuration.

    line 36
  5. Distinctive:

    Run configuration validation or local production-mode startup when feasible.

    line 37
  6. Very specific:

    Do not disable TLS/sandbox/security headers merely to make a local check pass.

    line 46
  7. Distinctive:

    If managed-platform settings are inaccessible, report them as external verification items rather than inferring defaults.

    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

Catch secure-code deployments made unsafe by configuration.

When to activate

Deployment/runtime configuration changes or a production-readiness review is requested.

When not to activate

Pure library code has no runtime/service configuration surface.

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

  • Deployment manifests/config
  • Environment designation
  • Network/auth architecture

Workflow

  1. Identify configurations whose safe value changes between development and production.
  2. Check debug/dev modes, wildcard CORS, cookie/session flags, TLS assumptions, exposed admin/metrics ports, default credentials, verbose errors, host binding, and security headers where applicable.
  3. Compare duplicate settings across application, proxy, container, and platform layers for contradictory values.
  4. Check secrets are references/variables rather than committed values.
  5. Verify fail-closed behavior for missing security-critical configuration.
  6. Run configuration validation or local production-mode startup when feasible.
  7. Record environment-specific controls that cannot be observed from the repository.

Relevant tools

Config search, container/runtime start, headers/probes, IaC tooling.

Safety restrictions

Do not disable TLS/sandbox/security headers merely to make a local check pass.

Validation

  • Production-mode configuration starts with intended security settings.
  • Missing critical configuration fails visibly/safely.
  • Findings cite the exact configuration source and environment scope.

Expected output

  • Configuration findings
  • Production-mode check
  • Unverifiable platform controls
  • Remediation evidence

Failure handling

If managed-platform settings are inaccessible, report them as external verification items rather than inferring defaults.

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: P019, P040. 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.