agentleFS
Sign inStart free
noahfranklinnoahfranklin/gideon/skills/network-device-pentest/SKILL.md

network-device-pentest

Skill2 starsChanged 47 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when testing network devices and appliances — routers, switches, firewalls, VPN concentrators, load balancers, wireless controllers, and management planes (Cisco, Juniper, Fortinet, Palo Alto, MikroTik, etc.). Covers management-interface exposure, default/weak credentials, insecure protocols, firmware/CVE exposure, SNMP, and configuration review. Authorized engagements only.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

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

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Default/weak credentials, shared local accounts, no MFA, legacy auth.

    line 21

≈ “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

Network Device & Appliance Testing

Security assessment of network infrastructure devices and their management planes. These devices are high-value: compromise often yields traffic visibility, pivot points, or full network control.

0. Authorization gate

  • Written scope naming devices/management IPs and change-freeze rules.
  • Explicit caution: config changes can cause outages — read-only unless cleared.
  • Backup/rollback plan and emergency contact confirmed.

1. Management-plane exposure

  • Identify management interfaces reachable from untrusted networks: web UI, SSH/Telnet, SNMP, API, and vendor management protocols.
  • Finding pattern: management plane exposed to user/internet zones.
  • Fix: dedicated management network/VLAN, ACLs, no internet-facing admin.

2. Authentication

  • Default/weak credentials, shared local accounts, no MFA, legacy auth.
  • Credential reuse across devices.
  • Fix: unique strong creds, centralized AAA (TACACS+/RADIUS) with MFA, disable unused local accounts.

3. Insecure protocols & services

  • Telnet, HTTP admin, SNMPv1/v2c with default community strings, legacy SSL/TLS, unauthenticated discovery protocols.
  • Fix: SSH/HTTPS only, SNMPv3, disable unused services and discovery protocols on untrusted interfaces.

4. Firmware & known vulnerabilities

  • Identify model + firmware version; map to vendor advisories/CVEs (VPN and firewall appliance CVEs are frequently exploited in the wild).
  • Fix: patch/upgrade cadence, subscribe to vendor advisories, retire EoL hardware.

5. Configuration review (high value, low risk)

  • Review running config for: weak SNMP, permissive ACLs/rules, any-any firewall rules, insecure management, logging gaps, weak encryption, unused open services, default settings.
  • Map firewall rule base against intended segmentation.
  • Fix: least-privilege rule base, tightened ACLs, logging to SIEM, config hardening per vendor/CIS benchmark.

6. Tooling

nmap (service/version), snmpwalk/snmp-check, ssh-audit, vendor CVE databases, config-analysis (manual + benchmark tools). Prefer configuration review over live exploitation to avoid outages.

7. Reporting

Per finding: device, interface/exposure, severity, business impact (traffic interception / pivot / outage risk), remediation. Emphasize management-plane isolation and patching. Checklist: references/device-checklist.md.

<sub>© 2026 noahfranklin · Part of the Gideon security suite · MIT License · Original work.</sub>

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.

Check your setup, free