agentleFS
Sign inStart free
ziggy42ziggy42/epsilon/.agents/skills/security-audit/SKILL.md

security-audit

Skill439 starsChanged 5 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Use this skill to perform a security-focused audit of the codebase to identify vulnerabilities, sandbox escapes, and logic flaws.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 174 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Trace Execution Paths: Follow the flow of untrusted data (instructions, indices, offsets, file descriptors) from ingestion to execution.

    line 30
  2. Very specific:

    Write the PoC: Place a Go test or a minimal .wasm file that reliably triggers the flaw inside the specific vulnerability directory.

    line 44
  3. Distinctive:

    Do NOT write tests that invoke a single VM instance concurrently.

    line 47
  4. Very specific:

    If a vulnerability is confirmed locally, document it in a README.md file located within the corresponding vulnerabilities/[id]/ directory …

    line 55
  5. Distinctive:

    No Speculation: If you cannot write a failing Go test to prove the bug, do not report it.

    line 92

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 174 edited versions of this file we could read. “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

Security Audit

Overview

Perform a rigorous security assessment of the Epsilon WebAssembly engine. The objective is to identify exploitable vulnerabilities, verify sandbox isolation, and ensure safe host interactions. Do not focus just on local changes, look at the project as a whole.

Procedure

1. Investigation Methodology

Your goal is to find flaws that automated tools or basic reviews miss. Do not restrict yourself to a predefined checklist. Instead, employ a systematic, deep-dive methodology:

  1. Select Entry Points: Begin at the boundaries where untrusted input enters the system or interacts with the host. High-value starting points include the main execution loop (e.g., epsilon/vm.go), host interface boundaries (e.g., wasip1/), or memory indexing operations.
  2. Spawn Specialized Subagents: For complex files or distinct components, spawn focused subagents to audit them in isolation. Instruct these subagents to investigate specific mechanics deeply rather than doing a shallow read.
  3. Trace Execution Paths: Follow the flow of untrusted data (instructions, indices, offsets, file descriptors) from ingestion to execution. Assume the input is malicious.
  4. Audit Specification Deviations: Compare the implementation of complex instructions against the WebAssembly 2.0 formal execution rules. Any optimization that skips or defers a spec-mandated check is a potential vulnerability.

2. Verification & PoC Generation

Never report a bug without actively triggering it locally.

  1. Create a Vulnerability Directory: For each confirmed flaw, create a new directory at vulnerabilities/[id]/ (e.g., vulnerabilities/VULN-01/).
  2. Write the PoC: Place a Go test or a minimal .wasm file that reliably triggers the flaw inside the specific vulnerability directory.
  3. Test Constraints:
    • Do NOT write tests that invoke a single VM instance concurrently.
    • To prove state leakage, write tests that run multiple independent VMs concurrently using go test -race.
    • To prove parser crashes or bounds-check failures, write a standard Go fuzz test (go test -fuzz).

3. Reporting Format

If a vulnerability is confirmed locally, document it in a README.md file located within the corresponding vulnerabilities/[id]/ directory using this exact format:

# [Concise Title of the Issue]

**Severity:** [Critical | High | Medium | Low] **Affected Component:** [File
path and function name] **Bug Type:** [e.g., Path Traversal, OOB Slice Panic,
State Leakage]

## Root Cause

[Strictly technical explanation of the code flaw. Cite specific lines. Explain
the gap between intended logic and actual behavior.]

## Execution Flow

[Step-by-step breakdown of how the PoC triggers the bug.]

## Observable Impact

[Exact result: e.g., "Go panic: index out of range", "Race condition detected".]

## Proposed Remediation

[Provide the specific Go code diff to patch the vulnerability.]

Critical Rules

  1. Isolation: You are strictly prohibited from modifying any existing files in the repository. All work, including PoCs and documentation, must be contained within the vulnerabilities/ directory.
  2. No Panics: The engine must never panic on untrusted WASM or invalid WASI arguments. All bounds and inputs must be validated and returned as standard Go errors.
  3. No Speculation: If you cannot write a failing Go test to prove the bug, do not report it.

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions195 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 195

    1. ruvnet/claude-flow★ 80ksame name
    2. ruvnet/ruflo★ 79ksame name
    3. PostHog/posthog★ 40ksame name
    4. Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27ksame name
    5. cloudflare/security-audit-skill★ 18ksame name
    6. rommapp/romm★ 14ksame name
    7. kubeshark/kubeshark★ 12ksame name
    8. maximhq/bifrost★ 9.3ksame name
    9. mono/SkiaSharp★ 5.6ksame name
    10. MaxMiksa/Auto-Company★ 3.2ksame name

    185 more not listed

    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.

  • Used alongsideProjects with it also use create-stories, story-done and 10 more.

    Other files people use alongside this one.

    Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
    • lilangMaxSkill

      create-stories

      Break a single epic into implementable story files. Reads the epic, its GDD, governing ADRs, and control manifest. Each story embeds its GDD requirement TR-ID, ADR guidance, acceptance criteria, story type, and test evidence path. Run after /create-epics for each epic.

      Also in 11 projects that use this

    • lilangMaxSkill

      story-done

      End-of-story completion review. Reads the story file, verifies each acceptance criterion against the implementation, checks for GDD/ADR deviations, prompts code review, updates story status to Complete, and surfaces the next ready story from the sprint.

      Also in 11 projects that use this

    • nicepkgSkill

      community-led-growth

      Expert in community-led growth (CLG) - leveraging user communities to drive acquisition, retention, and expansion. Covers building developer communities, user groups, ambassador programs, and turning customers into advocates. Knows the difference between community as a feature vs community as a growth engine, and how to measure community ROI. Use when "community-led, CLG, ambassador program, champion program, user community, developer community, word of mouth, user group, " mentioned.

      Also in 5 projects that use this

    • nicepkgSkill

      ph-community-outreach

      Engage Reddit, Indie Hackers, Hacker News and other communities for Product Hunt launches. Use this skill to identify relevant communities, craft appropriate posts, and drive cross-platform engagement without appearing spammy.

      Also in 5 projects that use this

    • +8 more from lilangMax
  • In this repository4 other files it gives its agents.

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