react-security-review
Skill3 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
OWASP-based security review of React/TypeScript front-ends. Detects framework (Vite/CRA/Next), entry points, and data flows; scans the OWASP Top 10 (2025) mapped to React client-side risks (raw-HTML XSS, URL/protocol injection, bundled secrets, insecure token storage, dependency CVEs, missing CSP, open redirects); emits an exec summary plus graded findings. Use to audit React for vulnerabilities. Not for architecture grading (react-architecture-checklist).
- Reads credentials
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- wilfreud/skills-or-somethingtheir own version, first seen Aug 19, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- wilfreud/skills-or-something★ 2same name
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 repository86 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- project-templates/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- project-templates/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- alembic-migration-managerSkill
- architecture-journalSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- automated-code-reviewSkill
- axum-scaffolderSkill
- capture-consolidateSkill
- cargo-package-scaffoldSkill
- code-review-coachSkill
- confluence-guide-writerSkill
- dependency-mapperSkill
- doc-syncSkill
- dotnet-architecture-checklistSkill
- dotnet-controller-api-scaffolderSkill
- dotnet-security-reviewSkill
- dotnet-vertical-sliceSkill
- ef-migration-managerSkill
- email-captureSkill
- environment-healthSkill
- evaluate-testsSkill
- fastapi-scaffolderSkill
- fitness-functionsSkill
- jira-comment-writerSkill
- legacy-migration-analyzerSkill
- minimal-api-scaffolderSkill
- nuget-package-scaffoldSkill
- oss-vettingSkill
- pattern-tradeoff-analyzerSkill
- php-api-scaffolderSkill
- php-architecture-checklistSkill
- php-feature-sliceSkill
- php-migration-managerSkill
- php-package-scaffoldSkill
- php-security-reviewSkill
- pr-feedback-writerSkill
- pypi-package-scaffoldSkill
- python-architecture-checklistSkill
- python-feature-sliceSkill
- python-modernization-analyzerSkill
- python-security-reviewSkill
- qraspi-architectureSkill
- qraspi-graduateSkill
- qraspi-implementSkill
- qraspi-planSkill
- qraspi-questionsSkill
- qraspi-researchSkill
- qraspi-skeletonSkill
- qrspi-implementSkill
- qrspi-planSkill
- qrspi-questionsSkill
- qrspi-researchSkill
- qrspi-specSkill
- react-app-scaffolderSkill
- react-architecture-checklistSkill
- react-component-scaffolderSkill
- react-feature-sliceSkill
- react-modernization-analyzerSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are 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.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 113
Evidence or it is not a finding: Run the tools; cite file:line and the OWASP category.
- Very specific: line 118
Federal/gov context → escalate: If NIST/FIPS/CUI/DOE applies, run security-review-federal after this base review.
≈ “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.
Files
React Security Review
"Security is not a product, but a process." — Bruce Schneier
Core Philosophy
Shared across the dotnet / python / php / rust / react security reviews — same values, language-specific threats.
Grounding note: the knowledge base has no React corpus. Use
collection="internal"for OWASP,collection="javascript"for JS/TS specifics, andcollection="ui_ux"for safe-by-default UI; cite react.dev and the OWASP cheat sheets as the React authority. Never invent areactcollection.
| # | Value | What it means |
| 1 | Validate at boundaries | Every external input (URL params, postMessage, API responses) validated/typed before use; never trust client-controlled data — even your own API's response shapes. |
| 2 | No raw HTML from untrusted data | Output is escaped by default (JSX does this); the raw-HTML escape hatch is sanitized or never fed user data. |
| 3 | Secrets out of the bundle | No API keys/tokens in client code; only intentionally-public VITE_/NEXT_PUBLIC_ values shipped; everything else stays server-side. |
| 4 | Authn/authz is server-enforced | The client never decides authorization — it only reflects it. Route guards are UX, not security; the API enforces. |
| 5 | Least privilege & safe defaults | Minimal scopes; safe link/target defaults; fail closed on missing data. |
| 6 | Protect data in transit & at rest | TLS only; tokens in memory or httpOnly cookies, not localStorage; no PII/tokens in logs or analytics. |
| 7 | Dependencies pinned & audited | Lockfile committed; npm audit / Snyk in CI; transitive CVEs reviewed (the npm tree is deep). |
| 8 | Evidence-based, graded findings | Every finding cites file:line + OWASP category + severity; report is graded and manager-readable. |
Workflow
Shared skeleton: DETECT → SCAN → EXECUTIVE SUMMARY → GRADED FINDINGS.
DETECT Framework (Vite/CRA/Next + React version), entry points (routes, forms, `postMessage`/
`iframe`, external script tags), and the APIs / storage the app talks to.
SCAN Walk the React Threat Checklist below, one OWASP category at a time. Gather evidence:
npm audit --omit=dev # known CVEs in the dependency tree
npx eslint . --plugin security # eslint-plugin-security + jsx-a11y
grep -rn "dangerously" src/ # raw-HTML escape hatch usage
grep -rn "localStorage\|sessionStorage" src/ # token storage
grep -rn "VITE_\|NEXT_PUBLIC_\|process.env" src/ # secrets exposed to the bundle
Every issue becomes a finding with file:line, OWASP category, and severity.
EXEC SUMMARY Manager-friendly: risk grade, count by severity, top 3 risks in plain language.
FINDINGS Technical table: severity · location · OWASP · finding · remediation.React Threat Checklist (language-specific)
| OWASP (2025) | React / front-end check | Severity signal |
| A01 Broken Access Control | Authorization enforced by the API, not just hidden routes/buttons; no sensitive data fetched then client-side filtered; no IDOR via predictable IDs in client calls | Critical |
| A02 Cryptographic Failures | Tokens not in localStorage (XSS-readable) — prefer httpOnly cookies or memory; no home-rolled crypto in the client; HTTPS-only links | High |
| A03 Injection (XSS) | JSX auto-escaping intact; the raw-HTML escape hatch (dangerously…InnerHTML) only on sanitized HTML (DOMPurify); no href={userUrl}/src= allowing javascript:; no dynamic code evaluation (eval, the Function constructor, injected <script>) on input | Critical |
| A04 Insecure Design | target="_blank" paired with rel="noopener noreferrer"; postMessage handlers check event.origin; no trust of window.name/referrer | High |
| A05 Misconfiguration | Content-Security-Policy present; source maps not shipped to prod (or access-controlled); no * CORS reliance; React dev build not served in prod | High |
| A06 Vulnerable Components | npm audit clean; lockfile committed; no abandoned/unmaintained UI deps; no latest ranges | High |
| A07 Auth/Session Failures | Login flows rate-limited server-side; tokens cleared on logout; no long-lived tokens in storage; refresh handled securely | High |
| A08 Integrity Failures | Third-party <script>/CDN tags use SRI (integrity); no untrusted dynamic import of attacker-controlled URLs | High |
| A09 Logging Failures | No tokens/PII sent to client analytics/error trackers (scrub before Sentry/GA); no secrets in console.log | Medium |
| A10 SSRF / Open Redirect | Redirect targets from query params allow-listed (no location.href = params.get('next')); image/iframe src from user input validated | High |
Full per-category checklist + grounding query map: owasp react checklist.
State Block
<security-review-state>
language: react
mode: DETECT | SCAN | EXEC-SUMMARY | FINDINGS | COMPLETE
detected: [framework+version | entry points | apis/storage]
owasp_covered: [A01..A10 progress]
findings: [critical:N high:N medium:N low:N]
last_action: [what was just done]
next_action: [what should happen next]
</security-review-state>Output Template
Shared across all security reviews. Executive summary template: executive summary.
## Security Review: [project] (React)
**Framework**: [Vite/CRA/Next + React x] | **Scope**: [paths] | **Risk grade**: [A–F]
### Executive Summary (manager-friendly)
[2–3 sentences: overall posture, the most serious risk in plain language, recommended next step.]
Findings: Critical [N] · High [N] · Medium [N] · Low [N]
### Technical Findings
| Severity | Location | OWASP | Finding | Remediation |
|----------|----------|-------|---------|-------------|
| CRITICAL | file:line | A03 | [pattern] | [fix] |
**Top 3 priorities**: 1. … 2. … 3. …Risk grade: A no critical/high · B no critical, ≤2 high · C no critical, multiple high · D 1+ critical · F systemic (unsanitized raw HTML + secrets in bundle + client-only authz).
AI Discipline Rules
- Evidence or it is not a finding. Run the tools; cite
file:lineand the OWASP category. No speculative findings. - Detect the framework first. React escapes JSX by default and Next.js adds headers/CSP options — confirm the safe defaults are used, not bypassed, before flagging.
- Client guards are UX, not security. A hidden admin route is never a control; the finding is the missing server-side check, not the visible button.
- Severity reflects exploitability + impact, not how unusual the pattern looks. XSS that reads a
localStoragetoken is Critical; a missingrel="noopener"is Low/Medium. - Architecture, not here. Structural/maintainability issues belong to
react-architecture-checklist— note and route. - Federal/gov context → escalate. If NIST/FIPS/CUI/DOE applies, run
security-review-federalafter this base review.
Integration with Other Skills
security-review-federal— Federal/gov overlay (NIST 800-53, FIPS, CUI, POA&M) applied on top of this base review.react-architecture-checklist— Companion for structure/maintainability; run first for context.supply-chain-audit— Deeper dependency/CVE and license analysis beyondnpm audit(the npm tree is the largest attack surface here).dotnet/python/php/rust-security-review — Sibling skills sharing this exact Core Values + workflow + output.
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.

