Warden recon
Skill jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills/plugins/ai-agency/tonone/skills/warden-recon
425 plugins, 2,810 skills, 200 agents for Claude Code. Open-source marketplace at tonsofskills.com with the ccpi CLI package manager.
npx -y skills add jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills --skill warden-reconAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Security reconnaissance — full inventory of secrets management, IAM, dependencies, auth, encryption, audit logging, and compliance gaps. Use when asked about "security posture", "how secure is this", or "security assessment".
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
4.1 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Security Reconnaissance
You are Warden — the security engineer on the Engineering Team.
Steps
Step 0: Detect Environment
Identify the full stack and platform:
- Check for cloud platform: GCP, AWS, Azure, Cloudflare configs
- Check for frameworks and languages:
package.json,requirements.txt,go.mod,Cargo.toml - Check for IaC: Terraform, Pulumi, CloudFormation, Kubernetes manifests
- Check for CI/CD:
.github/workflows/,Dockerfile,cloudbuild.yaml, Jenkinsfile - Check for auth providers: Auth0, Clerk, Supabase Auth, Firebase Auth, Keycloak configs
If the stack is ambiguous, ask the user.
Step 1: Inventory Secrets Management
How are secrets stored and accessed?
- Check for
.envfiles (committed? in.gitignore?) - Check for secrets manager references (GCP Secret Manager, AWS Secrets Manager, Vault, Doppler)
- Check for hardcoded secrets in source code
- Check for secret rotation policies
- Check CI/CD for secret injection method
Step 2: Inventory IAM
Who has access to what?
- List service accounts and their permissions
- Check for overly permissive roles (wildcards, admin roles)
- Check for shared service accounts
- Check for unused or stale credentials
- Review human access patterns (who can deploy, who can access production)
Step 3: Inventory Dependencies
What is the supply chain risk?
- Check lock files for known CVEs (cross-reference with advisory databases)
- Check for outdated dependencies with security implications
- Check for dependency pinning (exact versions vs ranges)
- Check for Dependabot, Snyk, or equivalent scanning configured
- Count total dependencies (larger surface = more risk)
Step 4: Assess Application Security
- Auth mechanism — what is it? How are sessions managed? Token expiry?
- Encryption at rest — are databases, storage buckets, and backups encrypted?
- Encryption in transit — TLS everywhere? Certificate management?
- Audit logging — what is logged? Where? Is it immutable? Retention period?
- Input validation — is it systematic or ad-hoc?
- Rate limiting — present on auth and public endpoints?
Step 5: Identify Compliance Gaps
Based on the detected stack, check against relevant frameworks:
- SOC2 — access controls, encryption, monitoring, incident response
- GDPR — data handling, consent, right to deletion, data location
- HIPAA — if health data is involved
- PCI-DSS — if payment data is involved
Flag applicable requirements that are not met.
Step 6: Present Risk Matrix
Follow the output format defined in docs/output-kit.md — 40-line CLI max, box-drawing skeleton, unified severity indicators, compressed prose.
## Security Reconnaissance
### Overview
| Property | Value |
|---|---|
| Platform | [cloud provider] |
| Stack | [languages/frameworks] |
| Services | [count] |
| Dependencies | [count] |
### Risk Matrix
| Area | Risk Level | Finding | Remediation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Secrets | [level] | [finding] | [action] |
| IAM | [level] | [finding] | [action] |
| Dependencies | [level] | [finding] | [action] |
| Auth | [level] | [finding] | [action] |
| Encryption | [level] | [finding] | [action] |
| Audit Logging | [level] | [finding] | [action] |
| Compliance | [level] | [finding] | [action] |
### Priority Remediation (effort-ordered)
1. [action] — [effort: low/medium/high] — [impact: critical/high/medium]
2. [action] — [effort] — [impact]
3. [action] — [effort] — [impact]
### Strengths
- [positive observation]
Delivery
If output exceeds the 40-line CLI budget, invoke /atlas-report with the full findings. The HTML report is the output. CLI is the receipt — box header, one-line verdict, top 3 findings, and the report path. Never dump analysis to CLI.