agentleFS
kaandgnshkaandgnsh/Claude-Blue/skills/appsec/sca-dependency-risk/SKILL.md

sca-dependency-risk

Skill0 starsChanged 12 days agoMITView on GitHub

Assess third-party dependency risk with software composition analysis — vulnerable versions (OSV, GitHub Advisory, NVD), reachability of vulnerable functions, license risk, maintainer health (OpenSSF Scorecard), transitive dependencies and safe upgrade paths. Use when reviewing dependency alerts (Dependabot, Snyk, osv-scanner), choosing a library, or prioritizing dependency upgrades.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    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. Very specific:

    Check maintenance (recent releases, issue response), Scorecard score (branch protection, signed releases, CI tests), number of maintainers, …

    line 35

≈ “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

SCA and Dependency Risk

Tools

osv-scanner scan source -r .                          # OSV database; lockfile-based (OSV-Scanner v2 syntax)
npm audit --omit=dev ; pip-audit -r requirements.txt ; govulncheck ./...   # ecosystem tools
trivy fs --scanners vuln,license .                    # filesystem/lockfiles
scorecard --repo=github.com/org/lib                   # OpenSSF Scorecard project health

govulncheck (Go) and some commercial tools report reachability — whether your code calls the vulnerable symbol.

Triage questions

QuestionEffect
Is the vulnerable package in production runtime, or dev/test only?Dev-only usually lower priority (but CI compromise risk)
Is the vulnerable function/feature used (reachability)?Unreachable → lower priority, still upgrade in normal cycle
Exploit maturity: KEV/EPSS, public PoC?Raises priority
Direct or transitive?Transitive fixes may need override/resolution (overrides in npm, constraints in pip, replace in Go)
Fixed version available? Breaking changes?Plan upgrade; read changelog

Choosing a new dependency

Check maintenance (recent releases, issue response), Scorecard score (branch protection, signed releases, CI tests), number of maintainers, download/popularity, install scripts (preinstall/postinstall in npm), license compatibility (copyleft GPL/AGPL in proprietary code needs legal review), and existing vulnerabilities.

Output

Package@version | Advisory (GHSA/CVE/OSV) | Severity/EPSS/KEV | Runtime? | Reachable? | Fix version | Breaking? | Decision | Owner

Related skills

sbom-vulnerability-analysis, dependency-confusion-defense, malicious-package-response, vuln-prioritization

References

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.