Security
Give your AI coding agent a personality. Composable persona + style + skills for Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI & OpenClaw. Ships Tech Persona Card v1.0 spec.
npx -y skills add telagod/code-abyss --skill securityAssembled 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
Defensive security engineering judgment, distilled from a stronger model - invoke when THREAT MODELING a system or feature; making security-relevant design decisions (auth, crypto, trust boundaries, attack surface); reviewing code for vulnerabilities (injection, IDOR, secrets, the OWASP classes); hardening operations (secrets management, detection, patching, incident response); or judging whether a security control/program is real or theater. Also invoke BEFORE any offensive-flavored request (pentest, exploit, credential testing) to apply the authorization gate. Also invoke when designing, reviewing, or hardening an LLM/agent system that reads untrusted content or holds tool/MCP access (prompt injection, excessive agency, MCP supply chain).
SKILL.md
3.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Security — scope gate, threat model, design, review, operations, traps, agentic AI
Rule content lives in the seven files below; this SKILL.md only routes
(doctrine/04-maintenance.md governs edits to this bundle too).
First, always: scope.md §1 — the authorization gate. It fires on ANY request
mentioning exploits, payloads, bypassing auth/WAF/filters, cracking, brute force,
credential/password testing, scanning a target, or accessing a system the requester
didn't build in this session — recognize the moment even when the ask is phrased as
"just write a script." Defensive work proceeds; offensive-flavored work needs
corroborated authorization context; some requests are refused regardless of framing.
Pass the gate before applying anything else in this bundle.
Route by moment
| You are about to… | Read (in this folder) |
|---|---|
| Judge scope — fires on ANY mention of exploits, payloads, bypassing auth/WAF, cracking, brute force, credential testing, scanning a target, or reaching a system the requester didn't build here | scope.md §1 |
| Decide what to protect, from whom, and where to spend | threat-model.md |
| Design auth, trust boundaries, crypto use, or a system's security posture | design.md |
| Review code for vulnerabilities, or report security findings | review.md |
| Handle secrets, hardening, logging/detection, dependencies, incidents | operate.md |
| Assess whether a control or security program is real; name why it smells | traps.md |
| Design, review, or harden a system where an LLM/agent reads untrusted content or holds tool/MCP access (prompt injection, excessive agency, MCP supply chain) | agentic.md |
A new system usually runs threat-model.md (four questions) → design.md →
review.md before ship → operate.md in production.
Scope and neighbors
Security judgment for building and defending systems. The application-level security
floor (input validation, per-object authz in backend/operate.md §5; rate limits in
backend/operate.md §7) also lives in the backend bundle — this bundle is the deeper
treatment. Agentic AI security (prompt injection, the lethal trifecta, tool-privilege
boundaries, MCP supply chain) is agentic.md — it extends this bundle's design/review/
operate rules to agents, not a replacement for them. General verification
discipline is methods/verify.md; whether to delegate → doctrine.
The stance
Attackers take the cheapest path; defenders must be honest about which door is open.
Threat model before controls (threat-model.md), assume breach (scope.md §3), make
the safe way the easy way (design.md §3) — and never confuse a control that exists
with a control that works (traps.md meta-signal). A clean review means "nothing found
where I looked," never "secure" (scope.md §5).