pentest-reporting
Skill47 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when turning security findings into a clear, actionable report — scoring severity with CVSS, writing findings with reproduction and impact, prioritizing remediation, producing an executive summary, and tracking retests to closure. The phase that makes testing matter.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jaskaranhundal/usap-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 5, 2026
- bob-reis/claude-pentest-skillstheir own version, first seen May 18, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- bob-reis/claude-pentest-skills★ 9same name
- jaskaranhundal/usap-skills★ 4same 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 repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- access-control-testingSkill
- active-pentestSkill
- api-security-testingSkill
- authentication-testingSkill
- business-logic-testingSkill
- client-side-exploitationSkill
- file-upload-and-ssrfSkill
- injection-testingSkill
- recon-and-osintSkill
- secrets-management-auditSkill
- security-code-auditSkill
- security-hardeningSkill
- security-testingSkill
- threat-modelingSkill
- vulnerability-chainingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
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
- Distinctive: line 13
Core principle: Write for two readers at once — an executive who needs *risk and priority*, and an engineer who needs *exact steps to …
- Distinctive: line 70
No retest — "fixed" without rerunning the exploit is a guess.
≈ “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
Pentest Reporting (REPORT phase — the end that makes the work count)
Overview
A vulnerability nobody fixes isn't security. This phase converts raw findings into a report that engineers can act on and leaders can prioritize: consistent severity, crisp reproduction, honest impact, concrete fixes, and tracked closure.
Core principle: Write for two readers at once — an executive who needs risk and priority, and an engineer who needs exact steps to reproduce and fix.
Structure of a good report
- Executive summary — plain-language risk posture, top 3–5 risks, overall verdict. No jargon.
- Scope & methodology — what was tested, environment, dates, what was out of scope.
- Findings — one entry each (see template), ordered by severity.
- Remediation roadmap — prioritized fix list with effort estimates.
- Retest results — status per finding after fixes (Open / Fixed / Risk-accepted).
- Appendix — tools, raw evidence, references.
Finding template (use for every issue)
Title: <Concise, e.g. "IDOR in /api/invoices exposes other users' billing">
Severity: Critical | High | Medium | Low | Info (CVSS x.x — vector)
Affected: <endpoint / file:line / component>
Summary: <1–2 sentences: what's wrong and why it matters>
Reproduction: <numbered, copy-pasteable steps / exact request>
Evidence: <response excerpt / screenshot, real data redacted>
Impact: <business consequence: data exposed, money, accounts, scope>
Remediation: <specific fix, link to security-hardening pattern>
Status: Open | Fixed (retested <date>) | Risk-acceptedSeverity & CVSS
Score consistently so priorities are defensible. See references/cvss-and-template.md for the
CVSS v3.1 metrics, a base-score cheat sheet, and a full report skeleton.
| Severity | Rough CVSS | Means |
| Critical | 9.0–10.0 | Fix now — full compromise / mass data / unauth RCE |
| High | 7.0–8.9 | Fix this cycle — ATO, sensitive data, privesc |
| Medium | 4.0–6.9 | Plan — needs conditions or limited impact |
| Low | 0.1–3.9 | Backlog — minor/defense-in-depth |
| Info | 0.0 | Note — best-practice, no direct risk |
Adjust for business context: a "Medium" on the payment path may be a "High" for you.
Writing rules
- Reproducible or it didn't happen — steps a developer can paste and rerun.
- Impact in business terms — "any user can read all invoices," not "missing authz check."
- One fix per finding — point to the exact
security-hardeningpattern. - No fear, no fluff — accurate severity; over-hyping burns trust, under-hyping gets ignored.
- Redact real data in evidence.
Retest & closure
For each fixed finding: rerun the original PoC, record pass/fail and date, set status. The report isn't done until every High+ is Fixed or explicitly Risk-accepted by an owner.
Hand-off
Findings come from all FIND/EXPLOIT skills; fixes from security-hardening; this skill
packages and tracks them to closure (retest each High+ before marking it fixed).
Common mistakes
- Dumping scanner output as "the report" — triage, dedupe, and verify first.
- Severity by gut feel — use CVSS + business context so priorities hold up.
- Reproduction steps that only you can follow — write for a stranger.
- No retest — "fixed" without rerunning the exploit is a guess.
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.