security-validate
Skill4 starsChanged 5 days agoMITView on GitHub
Verify OWASP ASVS 5.0.0 security assessment coverage, retest vulnerability fixes and reconcile code, scan and manual evidence. Use after security changes or when checking application audit completeness.
In this repository55 other files it gives its agents.
- design-balance-and-proportionSkill
- design-brand-and-art-directionSkill
- design-buildSkill
- design-color-theorySkill
- design-diagnoseSkill
- design-hierarchy-and-emphasisSkill
- design-imagery-and-textureSkill
- design-layout-and-gridSkill
- design-movement-and-flowSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- design-rhythm-and-patternSkill
- design-typographySkill
- design-unity-and-systemsSkill
- design-validateSkill
- security-api-files-and-realtimeSkill
- security-authentication-and-sessionsSkill
- security-authorizationSkill
- security-browser-and-originSkill
- security-buildSkill
- security-configuration-and-secretsSkill
- security-crypto-and-dataSkill
- security-dependencies-and-buildSkill
- security-diagnoseSkill
- security-injection-and-validationSkill
- security-logging-and-failureSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- security-threat-model-and-designSkill
- ux-accessibilitySkill
- ux-buildSkill
- ux-controls-and-inputsSkill
- ux-decisions-and-loadSkill
- ux-diagnoseSkill
- ux-feedback-and-performanceSkill
- ux-forms-and-errorsSkill
- ux-journeys-and-motivationSkill
- ux-navigation-and-structureSkill
- ux-onboarding-and-learningSkill
- ux-reviewSkill
- ux-trust-and-ethicsSkill
- ux-validateSkill
- ux-visual-hierarchySkill
- wcag-alternatives-and-mediaSkill
- wcag-assistive-tech-and-statusSkill
- wcag-buildSkill
- wcag-diagnoseSkill
- wcag-forms-and-error-preventionSkill
- wcag-keyboard-and-focusSkill
- wcag-language-and-predictabilitySkill
- wcag-navigation-and-discoverySkill
- wcag-pointer-and-touchSkill
- wcag-reviewSkill
- wcag-semantics-and-reading-orderSkill
- wcag-time-and-motionSkill
- wcag-validateSkill
- wcag-visual-and-responsiveSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
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
- Distinctive: line 10
Use for post-change security verification or checking an ASVS evidence ledger.
- Very specific: line 15
Check every selected ASVS requirement against ../security-diagnose/references/asvs/5.0.0/index.json.
- Distinctive: line 16
Use existing independent SAST, SCA, secret-scanning, configuration and authorized dynamic/manual tests for the changed failure modes.
- Distinctive: line 17
Test negative and abuse cases as well as normal operation.
- Very specific: line 18
Use distribution-side scripts/check_security_audit.py for structural completeness when accessible.
≈ “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
Validate an application security remediation and assessment evidence
Scope
Use for post-change security verification or checking an ASVS evidence ledger. Structural coverage checks do not establish that controls actually work. Keep the review limited to explicitly authorized systems and tools.
Procedure
- Resolve target ASVS 5.0.0 level and assessment boundary using
../security-diagnose/references/standard-selection.md; distinguish frontend evidence from server, identity or deployment evidence. - Check every selected ASVS requirement against
../security-diagnose/references/asvs/5.0.0/index.json; confirm full official requirement meaning through../security-diagnose/references/asvs/5.0.0/source-access.mdand record pass/fail, not applicable, not tested, and needs-manual-verification outcomes. Do not treat unavailable requirement text as a pass. - Use existing independent SAST, SCA, secret-scanning, configuration and authorized dynamic/manual tests for the changed failure modes. Pin tool versions, save invocation scope, methods and reproducible evidence.
- Test negative and abuse cases as well as normal operation; verify remediation did not regress expected authentication, tenancy isolation, data safety or availability.
- Use distribution-side
scripts/check_security_audit.pyfor structural completeness when accessible; otherwise validate by the bundled index and report gaps. Do not claim security certification or completed penetration testing.
Outcomes
Distinguish report format valid, coverage complete, requirements actually verified and any independent assurance or signoff. All are different states. Missing evidence is neither success nor failure; report it as unknown and follow the consuming organization’s policy.
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.