agentleFS
raniellimontagnaraniellimontagna/agent-toolkit/skills/security/source-leak-audit/SKILL.md

source-leak-audit

Skill3 starsChanged 32 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when checking an application, repository, build, or deployment for exposed source files, debug artifacts, backups, configuration, or secrets.

  • Reads credentials

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    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:

    Search source and generated files for filenames and patterns such as .env, *.map, .git/, backup, debug, phpinfo, private keys, and …

    line 26
  2. Distinctive:

    Check whether the exposed value is active using the owning team's approved rotation or revocation process.

    line 32
  3. Distinctive:

    Verify remediation by removing the artifact, invalidating caches, rotating credentials, and confirming the safe response status.

    line 34
  4. Distinctive:

    Never include secret values, full cookies, private keys, or personal data in a report, terminal output, issue, or model context.

    line 41
  5. Distinctive:

    Test leaked credentials against any service.

    line 54
  6. Distinctive:

    Treat a public client identifier as a secret without evidence of privilege.

    line 55

≈ “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

Source Leak Audit

Find accidentally published source and diagnostic artifacts while preserving confidentiality. The audit proves exposure and location without collecting or redistributing secret values.

When to Use

  • Reviewing a web deployment, static asset bucket, container image, or repo.
  • Investigating .env, source maps, backups, debug pages, directory listings, stack traces, or exposed API documentation.

Procedure

  1. Establish the exact authorized asset and deployment scope.
  2. Inspect repository ignore rules, build output, Docker layers, release artifacts, static hosting configuration, and server error handling.
  3. Search source and generated files for filenames and patterns such as .env, *.map, .git/, backup, debug, phpinfo, private keys, and connection strings. Record file path and line number, not values.
  4. For a controlled deployment, request only harmless metadata or a bounded prefix sufficient to prove the artifact exists. Stop when sensitive content is confirmed.
  5. Check whether the exposed value is active using the owning team's approved rotation or revocation process. Do not use the credential to authenticate.
  6. Verify remediation by removing the artifact, invalidating caches, rotating credentials, and confirming the safe response status.

Evidence Gate

An accessible filename is not enough. Confirm the artifact contains relevant source/configuration or that a debug response exposes meaningful internals. Never include secret values, full cookies, private keys, or personal data in a report, terminal output, issue, or model context.

Report

Record asset, path, response/build location, data class, exposure window if known, impact, containment action, and safe verification result. Use masked examples such as DATABASE_URL=postgres://***.

Do Not

  • Clone or archive an exposed private repository.
  • Download more content after confirming exposure.
  • Test leaked credentials against any service.
  • Treat a public client identifier as a secret without evidence of privilege.

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.