recon
Skill489 starsChanged 5 days agoMITView on GitHub
Perform structured reconnaissance and attack surface enumeration for authorized penetration tests, CTF challenges, and bug bounty programs. Use when the user mentions 'recon,' 'reconnaissance,' 'enumerate,' 'attack surface,' 'subdomain enumeration,' 'port scan,' 'fingerprint,' 'asset discovery,' or needs to map a target's external footprint.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 19 edited versions we read keep these.
5
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
Before running any commands, confirm:
- Distinctive: line 19
If authorization is unclear, ask before proceeding.
- Very specific: line 28
Run dig any $ARGUMENTS for A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, CNAME records
- Very specific: line 35
WHOIS and registration: Run whois $ARGUMENTS for registrant, nameserver, and creation date info.
- Very specific: line 37
Search engine dorking: Use targeted queries — site:, inurl:, filetype:, intitle: — to find exposed pages, documents, and admin panels.
- Distinctive: line 41
Public code repositories: Search GitHub/GitLab for the target's org name, domain, API keys, or internal paths.
- Distinctive: line 43
Historical data: Check the Wayback Machine for old endpoints, removed pages, and configuration files.
- Very specific: line 51
Start with top 1000 ports.
- Very specific: line 60
SSL/TLS analysis: Run testssl.sh or sslyze to check for weak ciphers, expired certificates, and misconfigurations.
- Distinctive: line 105
If you discover evidence of active compromise by a third party, alert the user immediately
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 19 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
Recon — Penetration Testing Reconnaissance
Perform structured reconnaissance against an authorized target, organizing findings into an actionable attack surface map.
Cross-references: osint-recon for the deeper open-source-intelligence pass (people, organizations, historical data) — this skill is the active/passive target-mapping side, osint-recon is the broader investigative side; they pair naturally. web-pentest for the next stage once recon has produced an attack surface map and an authorized target list. owasp-audit for source-code review when you have access to the target's code.
Authorization Check
Before running any commands, confirm:
- The user has written authorization for the target (pentest engagement, bug bounty program, CTF/lab environment)
- The target is within the defined scope
If authorization is unclear, ask before proceeding. Never assume authorization.
Methodology
Phase 1: Passive Recon
Gather information without touching the target directly.
DNS enumeration:
- Run
dig any $ARGUMENTSfor A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, CNAME records - Attempt zone transfer:
dig axfr @ns-server $ARGUMENTS - Enumerate subdomains via certificate transparency:
curl -s "https://crt.sh/?q=%25.$ARGUMENTS&output=json" | jq -r '.[].name_value' | sort -u
WHOIS and registration: Run whois $ARGUMENTS for registrant, nameserver, and creation date info.
Search engine dorking: Use targeted queries — site:, inurl:, filetype:, intitle: — to find exposed pages, documents, and admin panels.
Technology fingerprinting: Identify frameworks, CMS, server software, and JavaScript libraries from public-facing pages.
Public code repositories: Search GitHub/GitLab for the target's org name, domain, API keys, or internal paths.
Historical data: Check the Wayback Machine for old endpoints, removed pages, and configuration files.
Phase 2: Active Recon (explicit authorization only)
Port scanning:
nmap -sC -sV -oN scan-results.txt $ARGUMENTSStart with top 1000 ports. Expand to full range (-p-) if needed. Use -Pn if the host appears down but is in scope.
Service enumeration: Based on open ports, probe for version info and default configurations.
Web content discovery:
- Directory bruting with gobuster, feroxbuster, or dirsearch
- Virtual host enumeration
- API endpoint discovery (check
/api/,/v1/,/graphql,/swagger.json)
SSL/TLS analysis: Run testssl.sh or sslyze to check for weak ciphers, expired certificates, and misconfigurations.
Phase 3: Analysis
Correlate all findings. Identify the most promising attack vectors and prioritize by:
- Severity of potential impact
- Likelihood of exploitation
- Exposure level (internet-facing vs. internal)
Output Format
Produce a structured recon report:
# Recon Report
## Target: [target]
## Scope: [confirmed scope]
## Date: [date]
### Passive Findings
| Finding | Details | Relevance |
|---------|---------|-----------|
### Subdomains Discovered
- [list]
### Technologies Detected
- [list with versions where identified]
### Active Findings
| Port | Service | Version | Notes |
|------|---------|---------|-------|
### Attack Surface Summary
[Prioritized list of interesting findings with risk assessment]
### Recommended Next Steps
[Ordered list of what to investigate further]Boundaries
- Stay within the defined scope — never scan adjacent or out-of-scope systems
- Rate-limit aggressive scans to avoid disruption
- Log all commands run for the engagement record
- If you discover evidence of active compromise by a third party, alert the user immediately
- Refuse requests targeting systems without explicit authorization
- Refuse requests for mass scanning of unrelated targets
References
- PTES (Penetration Testing Execution Standard)
- OWASP Testing Guide
- Bug Bounty Methodology (jhaddix/tbhm)
Other versions23 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- imMamdouhaboammar/cybersecurity-skills★ 098% same
Wrote their own version · 22
- codexstar69/bug-hunter★ 546same name
- gavraz/recon★ 263same name
- skyf0xx/gambit★ 29same name
- wycats/ai-plugin★ 19same name
- wycats/vscode-ai-plugin★ 19same name
- sophonfinance-wq/finance-automation-portfolio★ 16same name
- franco-bianco/claude-skills★ 4same name
- kekurttel/pentest-skills★ 4same name
- Roshu18/bearstrike-ai★ 4same name
- catcatcatstudio/cat-skills★ 3same name
12 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.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use reporting and osint.
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.In this repository42 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-supply-chain-auditSkill
- ai-risk-managementSkill
- api-auditSkill
- breach-patternsSkill
- business-logic-testingSkill
- cicd-securitySkill
- cloud-auditSkill
- container-auditSkill
- control-auditSkill
- crypto-auditSkill
- csf-mappingSkill
- dependency-auditSkill
- disk-forensicsSkill
- finding-triageSkill
- fuzzing-harnessSkill
- hipaa-auditSkill
- iam-auditSkill
- incident-triageSkill
- log-watchSkill
- malware-triageSkill
- mobile-auditSkill
- native-code-reviewSkill
- osint-reconSkill
- owasp-auditSkill
- patch-sweepSkill
- pci-auditSkill
- personal-opsecSkill
- privacy-engineeringSkill
- prompt-injectionSkill
- red-team-engagementSkill
- scanner-pipelineSkill
- secrets-auditSkill
- security-commsSkill
- security-startSkill
- siem-detectionSkill
- soc-operationsSkill
- threat-huntingSkill
- threat-modelingSkill
- variant-analysisSkill
- vuln-researchSkill
- web-pentestSkill
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.

