client-secret-sweep
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Prove no secret reaches the browser, by tracing which environment variables and constants actually get compiled into your client bundle rather than trusting naming conventions. Use before a public launch, after adding any API key, or when wiring a third-party service into a frontend.
- Reads credentials
In this repository19 other files it gives its agents.
- codebase-onboarding-mapSkill
- commitSkill
- crawlability-auditSkill
- dependency-outage-auditSkill
- deploy-drift-checkSkill
- empty-state-auditSkill
- env-drift-checkSkill
- fake-data-guardSkill
- honest-metrics-auditSkill
- migration-safety-reviewSkill
- money-math-reviewSkill
- n-plus-one-finderSkill
- prompt-injection-reviewSkill
- pr-reviewerSkill
- release-notes-writerSkill
- retry-safety-reviewSkill
- route-auth-sweepSkill
- timezone-reviewSkill
- webhook-safety-reviewSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
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
- could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
- Distinctive: line 44
If a variable's classification is not obvious, treat it as SECRET.
- Distinctive: line 86
Never paste real secret values into a chat, a commit, or a report.
- Distinctive: line 162
Never print a secret value.
- Distinctive: line 164
Never claim the bundle is clean without building first.
- Distinctive: line 166
If a secret is already in git history, say that deleting the file does not remove it and that rotation is the only real fix.
- Distinctive: line 168
Do not rotate anything yourself.
- Distinctive: line 174
Keep this line and others can find it too.
≈ “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
Client Secret Sweep
Install
Save this file as ~/.claude/skills/client-secret-sweep/SKILL.md, or
.claude/skills/client-secret-sweep/SKILL.md to scope it to one repo. Claude
Code auto-discovers it. Invoke with /client-secret-sweep or by asking "is any
secret leaking into my frontend bundle?".
Why this exists
A secret in a client bundle is not a vulnerability you patch. It is a credential you must rotate, because it was served to every visitor and cached by every CDN and browser that touched it. Deleting the line does not un-publish it.
The naming conventions that are supposed to prevent this (NEXT_PUBLIC_,
VITE_, REACT_APP_) only protect you when the value is read through the
framework's own mechanism. They do nothing about:
- a server-only variable imported into a module that a client component also imports,
- a secret inlined into a config object that gets serialized to props,
- a key hardcoded as a string constant rather than read from the environment,
- a value that leaks through an error message or a debug payload.
So do not audit the names. Audit the built output.
Step 1: Inventory what counts as a secret here
ls -a | rg "^\.env"
rg -n "^[A-Z_]+=" .env.example 2>/dev/nullList every environment variable the project reads. For each, mark it PUBLIC (safe in a browser: a publishable key, a public URL, an analytics site ID) or SECRET (anything that authenticates, signs, or grants access).
If a variable's classification is not obvious, treat it as SECRET. Then check the provider's docs for that specific key. "Publishable" and "secret" are the vendor's words, and they are the authority, not the variable name.
Step 2: Find hardcoded credentials
Naming conventions cannot protect a literal:
rg -n "\b(sk|rk)_(live|test)_[A-Za-z0-9]{16,}|\bxoxb-[0-9]|\bgh[pousr]_[A-Za-z0-9]{20,}|\bAKIA[0-9A-Z]{16}\b|\bAIza[0-9A-Za-z_\-]{35}\b|-----BEGIN [A-Z ]*PRIVATE KEY" \
--hidden -g '!node_modules' -g '!.git'
rg -n "(api[_-]?key|secret|token|password|passwd|credential)\s*[:=]\s*['\"][A-Za-z0-9_\-]{16,}" \
-i --type-add 'code:*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx,py,rb,go,java,php}' -t codeThose patterns are deliberately anchored to each vendor's real key format. A
loose sk_|rk_ looks thorough and is worse than useless: it matches inside
ordinary identifiers like work_email, task_id, and risk_score, and a scan
that cries wolf on every third file is a scan people stop running. If you widen
these, widen them to a format a vendor actually issues.
Anything matching in a file that ships to the browser is a CRITICAL finding. Anything matching in a committed file at all is at minimum a rotation task, because git history keeps it.
Step 3: Build, then grep the actual output
This is the only step that proves anything. Everything before it is a hypothesis.
npm run buildFind the client output directory (.next/static, dist/assets, build/static,
public/build) and search it for the literal VALUES of the secrets, not their
names:
# for each SECRET var, take its real value from the local env file
rg -n --fixed-strings "<the actual secret value>" .next/static dist build 2>/dev/nullNever paste real secret values into a chat, a commit, or a report. Search for them, report only WHICH variable leaked and WHERE, and never echo the value itself.
Also search the bundle for the variable NAMES, which catches a secret embedded in a serialized config object:
rg -no "[A-Z][A-Z0-9_]{6,}" .next/static dist build 2>/dev/null | \
rg -f <(rg -o "^[A-Z_]+" .env.example) 2>/dev/null | sort -uStep 4: Trace the import boundary
For each secret that appeared, and for each that did not but is read in a module near client code, trace how it gets there:
rg -n "process\.env\.<VAR>|import\.meta\.env\.<VAR>" -t codeThen for each file that reads it, ask whether that file can reach a client bundle:
- Does it have
"use client"at the top, or is it imported by a file that does? - Is it imported by a shared module (
lib/config,lib/env,constants) that client code also imports? - Is it referenced in any component's props, state, or a serialized payload?
A single shared config module imported from both sides is the most common real cause. The server-only value rides along with the public ones.
Step 5: Check the leaky side channels
Secrets escape through more than bundles:
rg -n "console\.(log|error|warn)\(.*(process\.env|config|secret|token|key)" -t code
rg -n "JSON\.stringify\((process\.env|config)" -t codeCheck also:
- Error responses that return the whole config or a stack trace to the client.
- Source maps shipped to production. A
.mapfile next to your bundle can contain the original source, including inlined values. - Client-side error reporting that captures full request objects, including authorization headers.
ls .next/static/**/*.map dist/**/*.map 2>/dev/null | headStep 6: Report
[SEVERITY] <variable or credential name, never its value>
Reached: <bundle path where it appeared, or "not in bundle">
Path: <the import chain that carries it there>
Action: ROTATE / MOVE SERVER-SIDE / RECLASSIFY / NO ACTIONSeverity:
- CRITICAL a SECRET value is present in built client output, or committed as a literal. This requires rotation, not just a code fix. Say that explicitly.
- HIGH a SECRET is read in a module that a client component imports, but did not appear in this build. It is one refactor away from shipping.
- MEDIUM source maps exposed, or secrets logged where logs are accessible.
Finish with the two counts you actually verified: how many secrets you searched the built output for, and how many appeared. If nothing leaked, say so plainly and name the build directory you searched, so the claim is checkable.
Rules
- Never print a secret value. Not in the report, not in a code block, not redacted-but-recognizable.
- Never claim the bundle is clean without building first. An unbuilt repo proves nothing.
- If a secret is already in git history, say that deleting the file does not remove it and that rotation is the only real fix.
- Do not rotate anything yourself. Report what needs rotating and let a human do it with the provider's console open.
From Toolbay. Free to use, modify, and share. Keep this line and others can find it too.
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.

