repo-security-audit
Skill2 starsChanged 22 days agoMITView on GitHub
When auditing a code repository for security vulnerabilities (full audit, pen-test style review, or a quick security pass), or triaging whether a reported vulnerability really matters. Uses Cloudflare's open-source security-audit skill.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- zerox80/claude-skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- zerox80/claude-skill★ 0same 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 repository14 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- confluence-operationsSkill
- devto-articleSkill
- download-website-to-markdownSkill
- english-tech-blog-structureSkill
- linkedin-articleSkill
- llm-evaluationSkill
- md-deckSkill
- pdf-to-markdownSkill
- sales-agentSkill
- threat-model-attack-reviewSkill
- visual-colorSkill
- visual-diagramSkill
- zenn-articleSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 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.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
Full audit mode: only when an audit, pen test, or report is explicitly requested.
- Distinctive: line 18
Do repository work in a cloud coding agent on the target repo, not on the user's computer.
- Very specific: line 21
use the profile asked for (default quick for a first look, standard otherwise) and state it in the report.
- Very specific: line 22
write the output directory outside the target (or in a git-ignored path), run validate-findings.cjs and validate-coverage-ledger.cjs with …
- Very specific: line 23
not modify target source, not open a fix PR, not probe deployed endpoints or live services.
≈ “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
Repo security audit (Cloudflare security-audit skill)
Source: https://github.com/cloudflare/security-audit-skill (MIT). The skill lives in skills/security-audit/ (SKILL.md plus companion files RECONNAISSANCE.md, HUNTING.md, ATTACK-CLASSES.md, VALIDATION-AND-REPORTING.md, domain companions, report-schema.json and the two validators).
Two modes
- Guidance mode (default): for triaging one alert, a dependency advisory, or a focused question. Read only SKILL.md's core principles and the relevant companion file. No output directory, no artifacts. Apply its rules: a finding needs a lower-trust principal, a crossed boundary and a concrete result; missing best practices are hardening notes, not vulnerabilities; severity follows the critical/high/medium/low anchors in SKILL.md.
- Full audit mode: only when an audit, pen test, or report is explicitly requested. Run all six phases.
Running a full audit
- Do repository work in a cloud coding agent on the target repo, not on the user's computer.
- In the agent's prompt, tell it to:
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cloudflare/security-audit-skilloutside the target repo and followskills/security-audit/SKILL.mdin full audit mode;- use the profile asked for (default
quickfor a first look,standardotherwise) and state it in the report; - write the output directory outside the target (or in a git-ignored path), run
validate-findings.cjsandvalidate-coverage-ledger.cjswith Node; - not modify target source, not open a fix PR, not probe deployed endpoints or live services; if an OS-enforced sandbox is unavailable, do not execute target code and keep those leads as
needs_validation; - save
REPORT.md,FINDINGS-DETAIL.md,NEEDS-VALIDATION.mdandfindings.jsonas artifacts and return a short summary: confirmed findings by severity, needs-validation items, and coverage gaps.
- Relay the result to the user in their language: confirmed findings first with severity and the smallest fix, then items needing validation. Offer fix PRs separately; never make them as part of the audit.
- Repeated runs are additive (a single run finds roughly half of what repeated runs find), so keep prior run outputs and pass them to later runs.
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.

