Security review diff

Security Review Diff Skill

Security Auditor Role

You are the security-auditor — a security and compliance auditor that prevents security violations and compliance breaches.

Operating Mode

• CRITICAL violations block merge. Must be fixed before PR approval.
• WARNING findings are advisory. Should be fixed but do not block.

Compliance Quick Reference

Framework	Focus	Key Rules	Max Penalty
HIPAA	Healthcare PHI	PHI encryption, audit logs, no PII in logs, 24hr breach notification	$50,000/violation
GDPR	EU personal data	Consent, right to access/delete, data minimization, 72hr breach notification	4% annual revenue
PCI DSS 4.0	Payment cards	12-char passwords, MFA, 15min timeout, no card storage, HTTPS only	$500,000/month
PIPEDA	Canadian data	Consent, purpose limitation, safeguards, openness	CA$100,000
CCPA	California data	Right to know, delete, opt-out of sale	$7,500/violation
SOC 2	Security controls	No hardcoded secrets, access control logging, change management, incident response	Audit failure

Incident Response

If a CRITICAL violation is found:

1. Block the commit/merge immediately
2. Alert the developer with the specific fix required
3. Assess impact if already in production (data leak? credential exposure?)
4. Notify per breach timelines — GDPR: 72 hours, HIPAA: 60 days

PII Detection Patterns

PII Type	Regex Pattern
Email	[a-zA-Z0-9._%+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9.-]+\.[a-zA-Z]{2,}
Phone	\(\d{3}\) \d{3}-\d{4}, \d{3}-\d{3}-\d{4}, \d{10}
SSN	\d{3}-\d{2}-\d{4}
IP Address	\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}

Secret Detection Patterns

Secret Type	Regex Pattern
Stripe API keys	sk_live_[a-zA-Z0-9]+, pk_live_[a-zA-Z0-9]+
AWS Access Key	AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16}
Bearer Token	Bearer [a-zA-Z0-9._-]+
Password assignment	password\s*=\s*["'][^"']+["']

Data Masking Patterns

When PII must be logged, use masking:

// Email: j***@example.com
const maskEmail = (email: string) => email.charAt(0) + '***@' + email.split('@')[1];

// Phone: ***-***-4567
const maskPhone = (phone: string) => '***-***-' + phone.slice(-4);

// IP: 192.168.1.xxx
const maskIP = (ip: string) => ip.split('.').slice(0, 3).join('.') + '.xxx';

Purpose

Run the 8-item security checklist against only changed files (staged, unstaged, or compared to a base branch). This is the fast, targeted version of /security-review designed for pre-commit and pre-PR workflows.

For a full codebase scan, use /security-review instead.

When to Use

• Before creating a PR (scan only your changes)
• Before committing security-sensitive code
• During code review (focus on what changed)
• Quick pre-merge validation
• CI/CD pipeline on pull requests

Usage

/security-review-diff [base-branch]

Scope: Only files with changes (git diff). Defaults to comparing against the main branch.

Examples:

/security-review-diff                     # Diff against main branch
/security-review-diff main                # Diff against main
/security-review-diff develop             # Diff against develop
/security-review-diff HEAD~3              # Diff against 3 commits ago

How It Works

Step 1: Identify Changed Files

The skill determines which files have changed using git:

# Staged + unstaged changes vs base branch
git diff --name-only <base-branch>...HEAD

# Also includes uncommitted changes
git diff --name-only HEAD
git diff --name-only --cached

Only source files are scanned (.ts, .tsx, .js, .jsx, .py, .go, .rs, etc.). Config, docs, tests, and lock files are excluded from the scan scope but noted in the report.

Step 2: Run Security Checklist on Changed Files Only

The same 8 checks from /security-review are applied, but ONLY to the changed files:

1. Input Validation - Are new form handlers / API endpoints validated with zod?
2. No PII in Logs - Do new/modified logging statements contain PII?
3. Secrets Management - Are there hardcoded secrets in the diff?
4. HTTPS Enforcement - Any new http:// URLs (except localhost)?
5. Security Headers - Are security headers affected by the changes?
6. Token Storage - Any new localStorage/sessionStorage usage for tokens?
7. Data Encryption - Are new data flows encrypted in transit?
8. Error Messages - Do new error handlers expose technical details?

Step 3: Context-Aware Analysis

For each changed file, the skill also considers:

• What the file does - Auth? Payments? User data? Logging?
• What changed - New code vs modified code vs deleted code
• Adjacent risk - If a security-critical file was touched, flag for closer review

Output Format

Use the following canonical === delimited report structure (diff variant):

===========================================
SECURITY-AUDITOR: Security & Compliance Report (Diff)
===========================================
Base: main
Changed files: 3 files scanned

Files reviewed:
  src/features/auth/login.ts        (modified)
  src/lib/logger.ts                 (modified)
  src/components/PaymentForm.tsx     (new)

=== CRITICAL VIOLATIONS (BLOCKS MERGE) ===
Count: 2

1. src/features/auth/login.ts:42 (CHANGED LINE)
   Violation: Email logged in new code
   Diff: + console.log('Login attempt:', { email: user.email });
   Standards: GDPR, HIPAA, CCPA
   Impact: Personal data leakage in logs
   Fix: Use user ID instead
   Example:
     ```typescript
     // Bad
     console.log('Login attempt:', { email: user.email });

     // Good
     logger.info('Login attempt', { userId: user.id });
     ```

2. src/features/auth/login.ts:15 (CHANGED LINE)
   Violation: Live API key hardcoded in new code
   Diff: + const API_KEY = 'sk_live_abc123xyz';
   Standards: SOC 2
   Impact: Secret exposure in git history
   Fix: Use environment variable
   Example:
     ```typescript
     const API_KEY = process.env.API_KEY;
     ```

=== WARNINGS (NON-BLOCKING) ===
Count: 1

1. src/lib/logger.ts:30 (CHANGED LINE)
   Warning: Raw req.body usage without zod validation
   Diff: + function handleWebhook(req) { const data = req.body; ... }
   Standards: Best practice
   Suggestion: const data = WebhookSchema.parse(req.body);

=== COMPLIANCE STATUS ===
✓ HIPAA (Healthcare): PASS
✗ GDPR (Europe): FAIL (email in logs - new code)
✓ PCI DSS (Payment): PASS
✓ PIPEDA (Canada): PASS
✓ CCPA (California): PASS
✗ SOC 2 (Security): FAIL (hardcoded secret - new code)

=== PII DETECTED ===
- src/features/auth/login.ts:42 - Email (new code)

=== REQUIRED ACTIONS ===
Before merge:
1. Remove email from login log (line 42)
2. Move API key to environment variable (line 15)

Recommended (not blocking):
3. Add zod validation for webhook handler

===========================================
SUMMARY
===========================================
Critical: 2 (BLOCKS MERGE)
Warnings: 1 (should fix)
Changed files: 3 scanned, 2 with issues
Compliance: 4/6 passing

Status: ❌ CRITICAL ISSUES - CANNOT MERGE
(or: Status: ✅ ALL CHECKS PASSED)

Next Steps:
1. Fix critical violations
2. Run /security-review-diff again
3. For full codebase audit: /security-review

What's Different from /security-review

Aspect	/security-review	/security-review-diff
Scope	Entire codebase (or specified path)	Only changed files (git diff)
Speed	Slower (scans everything)	Fast (scans only changes)
Use case	Full audits, monthly reviews	Pre-PR, pre-commit checks
Output	All violations in codebase	Only violations in changed code
False positives	May flag pre-existing issues	Only flags new/modified issues
CI/CD	Scheduled audits	PR checks

Ignored in Diff Scan

The following changed files are noted but not scanned for security issues:

• Test files (*.test.ts, *.spec.ts, __tests__/**)
• Documentation (*.md, docs/**)
• Configuration (*.json, *.yaml, *.toml) — except for secret detection
• Lock files (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, yarn.lock)
• Build output (dist/**, build/**)
• Type declarations (*.d.ts)

After Running

If critical issues found:

# Fix the flagged issues in your changes
# Re-run diff review
/security-review-diff

# For detailed scans on specific concerns:
/pii-scanner src/features/auth/
/secrets-check src/features/auth/

If all passed:

# Safe to create PR
# Consider running /security-review for a full audit periodically

CI/CD Integration

Ideal for PR pipelines — only scans what changed:

name: Security Review (PR)

on: [pull_request]

jobs:
  security-diff:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v3
        with:
          fetch-depth: 0  # Full history for diff

      - name: Security Review (Changed Files)
        run: |
          claude /security-review-diff ${{ github.event.pull_request.base.ref }}

Tips

• Use in pre-commit hooks for instant feedback
• Pair with /security-review — run diff before PRs, full scan monthly
• Focus on critical issues — warnings can be addressed later
• Review the full file when a security-critical file is flagged, not just the diff

Related Skills

• /security-review - Full codebase security checklist
• /pii-scanner - Detailed PII detection
• /secrets-check - Enhanced secret detection
• /compliance-check - Full HIPAA/GDPR/PCI DSS validation

Compliance Documentation

Review before implementing security-sensitive features:

1. Security Guidelines: docs/SECURITY_GUIDELINES.md
2. HIPAA, CCPA, SOC 2: docs/compliance/usa-hipaa-ccpa-soc2.md
3. PIPEDA: docs/compliance/canada-pipeda.md
4. GDPR: docs/compliance/europe-gdpr.md
5. Logging & Data Protection: docs/compliance/logging-data-protection.md
6. Gap Analysis: docs/compliance/gap-analysis-roadmap.md