Threat model
Defensive security & production-grade engineering skills for Claude Code — auth, OWASP audit, threat modeling, secrets, logging.
npx -y skills add AL-JANEF/janefskills --skill threat-modelAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- 11 days oldThe repository was created 11 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Run a structured threat-modeling pass at the design stage — before code — to find security risks in an architecture or feature. Uses STRIDE (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information disclosure, Denial of service, Elevation of privilege) to systematically ask "how could this be attacked?". Use this skill whenever the user is designing a system, planning a new feature, drawing an architecture, defining APIs, or asks "what could go wrong security-wise?" — especially before implementation begins. Defensive only: it identifies risks and mitigations, it does not plan attacks.
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
4.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Threat Model
The cheapest security fix is the one made before the code exists. This skill runs a disciplined pass over a design to surface risks early, using STRIDE so the analysis is systematic rather than "whatever we happen to think of."
The core question repeated at every trust boundary: what does an attacker gain by spoofing, tampering, denying, disclosing, disrupting, or escalating here?
When to reach for this skill
Use it at design time: a new system or service, a new feature touching data or auth, an architecture diagram, a set of API contracts, or any "how should we build X?" where X handles sensitive data, money, identity, or multi-tenant access. If the user is still deciding how to build something, this is the moment — cheaper than auditing it later.
The method
1. Establish scope and assets
Name what you're protecting before hunting threats. Identify: the sensitive assets (user data, credentials, money, tenant boundaries, PII), the actors (anonymous users, authenticated users, admins, external services), and the trust boundaries (where data crosses from less-trusted to more-trusted — client→server, service→service, user→tenant). Threats live at trust boundaries; that's where to look hardest.
2. Apply STRIDE at each boundary
For each trust boundary and data flow, walk the six STRIDE categories and ask whether each applies:
- Spoofing — can an attacker pretend to be someone else? (weak auth, stealable tokens, no service-to-service authentication)
- Tampering — can data be modified in transit or at rest? (no integrity checks, mutable client-side values trusted by server, missing TLS)
- Repudiation — can someone deny an action with no trace? (no audit log of sensitive operations)
- Information disclosure — can data leak? (verbose errors, IDOR, unencrypted storage, over-broad API responses, cross-tenant leakage)
- Denial of service — can availability be destroyed? (no rate limiting, unbounded queries, expensive operations triggerable by anyone)
- Elevation of privilege — can a low-privilege actor gain higher rights? (missing authorization checks, insecure direct role assignment, injection leading to code execution)
Not every category applies to every flow — the discipline is in asking each one, then recording the ones that hit.
3. Rate and prioritize
For each identified threat, judge likelihood and impact roughly (high/medium/low each). Focus mitigation effort on high-impact threats first. Don't demand a formal scoring system for a small feature — proportional rigor.
4. Assign mitigations
Every accepted threat gets one of: a mitigation (a control that reduces it), an acceptance (a documented decision to live with it and why), or a transfer (push it to a provider/library). "We'll think about it later" is not an outcome — name the decision.
See references/stride-prompts.md for a fuller set of guiding questions per
category, and references/example.md for a worked threat model of a typical
multi-tenant API feature.
Output format
Produce a threat model table plus a prioritized mitigation list:
## Threat Model: <feature/system>
### Assets & trust boundaries
- Assets: ...
- Boundaries: ...
### Threats (STRIDE)
| # | Boundary | STRIDE | Threat | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|----------|--------|--------|-----------|--------|------------|
| 1 | ... | Info disclosure | ... | High | High | ... |
### Priorities
1. <highest-impact threat> → <mitigation> → <owner/when>
Keep threats concrete and tied to this design, not generic. A threat the reader can't act on isn't worth listing.
Handing off to build
A threat model is only useful if its mitigations become work. End by turning the
top mitigations into concrete build tasks — the things that must be true in the
implementation. This is where threat-model connects to auth-hardening and
vuln-audit: the mitigations named here become the checks those skills enforce
later.
References
references/stride-prompts.md— Expanded question prompts per STRIDE category to drive a thorough pass. Read it when running the analysis.references/example.md— A worked example threat model for a multi-tenant API endpoint, showing the method end to end.