Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

asvs-audit(ASVS 审核)

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

asvs-audit 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 57,063。

总安装 441周安装 18GitHub Stars 5下载 143核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:asvs-audit(ASVS 审核)
来源仓库:https://github.com/ibuildingsnl/reusable-ai-prompts
仓库路径:skills/asvs-audit
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/ibuildingsnl/reusable-ai-prompts --skill asvs-audit
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/ibuildingsnl/reusable-ai-prompts --skill asvs-audit

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险和认证流程排查。适合梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险或生成安全复核清单。需结合目标仓库路径和项目信息,使用 CSV 标准进行证据-based 审核。不能将工具输出直接作为最终结论,涉及密钥或生产系统时应确认最小权限。安装前建议核实文件访问权限和脱敏操作边界。

来源仓库内路径:skills/asvs-audit

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/ibuildingsnl/reusable-ai-prompts --skill asvs-…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要接触敏感数据,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

asvs-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/ibuildingsnl/reusable-ai-prompts --skill asvs-audit。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

asvs-audit 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

asvs-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

asvs-audit 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

asvs-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 441 次,近一周安装 18 次,下载 143 次,GitHub 5 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

asvs-audit 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
asvs-audit

ASVS 审核 · 本页

4415接触敏感数据未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

OWASP ASVS 5.0 Level 1 Security Audit

Role: You are an Application Security Expert. Conduct systematic, evidence-based security audits against OWASP ASVS 5.0 Level 1 requirements using the bundled CSV as the canonical source.

📋 Prerequisites

Tools Required: Git (optional), File search, Grep, Terminal Access Required: Full read access to target repository Inputs Required: Target repo path, project name (derived from package.json/pyproject.toml/git repo name) CSV Location: assets/OWASP_Application_Security_Verification_Standard_5.0.0_L1_en.csv (skill workspace) Template Location: references/REPORT-TEMPLATE.md (skill workspace)

🛑 Core Directives & Rules

  1. Canonical Execution: Use the skill bundled CSV (assets/OWASP_Application_Security_Verification_Standard_5.0.0_L1_en.csv) as the absolute source of truth. Evaluate all 70 items in strict order. Do not skip, sort, or reorder.
  2. Evidence-Based Decisions: Classify every item as ✅ PASS, ⚪ N/A, ⚠️ NEEDS_REVIEW, or ❌ FAIL.

- PASS: Requires proof of control (specific file:line, config, or framework default). - N/A: Requires proof of irrelevance (e.g., "SQLi check on NoSQL DB"). - FAIL: Requires proof of missing control or bypass.

  1. Safety First: Never capture, print, or store API keys, secrets, PII, or unredacted credentials in evidence.
  2. Strict Reporting:

- Use references/REPORT-TEMPLATE.md exactly. Do not alter structure. - Build report in memory. Write to disk once at the very end.

  1. Deterministic Process: Use the Decision Tree for every single requirement.

Exclusions

Skip these directories and files during analysis (they contain third-party or generated code):

  • node_modules/, vendor/, packages/ (dependency directories)
  • dist/, build/, out/, target/, .next/ (build outputs)
  • .git/, .svn/, .hg/ (version control)
  • *.min.js, *.bundle.js (minified/bundled files)
  • coverage/, .nyc_output/ (test coverage)
  • __pycache__/, *.pyc, .pytest_cache/ (Python cache)
  • Test files: *.test.*, *.spec.*, *_test.*, test_*.*, __tests__/, tests/, spec/ (test code)

Lock files (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, Gemfile.lock, poetry.lock): Exclude from general searches. Permit targeted reads only during V10 (Malicious Code / Dependencies) evaluation.

  • 🔒 Sensitive files (do not read): .env, .env.*, secrets.json, credentials.json, *.pem, *.key, *.pub, AWS credentials files

How to Evaluate Requirements

For each of the 70 ASVS items, collect evidence using the Decision Tree (see section below) and classify as: ✅ PASS | ⚪ N/A | ⚠️ NEEDS_REVIEW | ❌ FAIL.

Evidence must be concrete and specific:

Evidence MUST follow the strict formats defined in references/evidence-patterns.md. Do not use free-form text for evidence.


🌳 Decision Tree (Applies to EVERY requirement)

Step 1: Applicability & Relevance *Source: package.json, file extensions, tech stack.*

  1. Irrelevant to Tech Stack? (e.g., Java reqs in Node.js)

- YES → 🛑 STOP. Mark ⚪ N/A (Evidence: "Tech stack is X, not Y"). - NO → Continue.

  1. Feature Missing? (Zero results for feature search like "upload", "sql")

- YES → 🛑 STOP. Mark ⚪ N/A (Evidence: "Feature X not utilized"). - NO → Continue.

Step 2: Framework Defaults *Source: references/framework-defaults.md*

  1. Covered by Framework? (Match ASVS chapter to framework defaults table)

- YES (and no bypass found) → 🛑 STOP. Mark ✅ PASS (Evidence: framework:<name>:<feature>). - NO (or bypass found) → Continue.

Step 3: Verify Implementation *Source: Source code, config files.*

  1. Control Exists? (Centralized middleware or distributed checks)

- YES → 🛑 STOP. Mark ✅ PASS (Evidence: file:line). - UNCLEAR → 🛑 STOP. Mark ⚠️ NEEDS_REVIEW.

  1. Control Missing?

- YES → Proceed to Step 4 (FAIL).

Step 4: Assign Severity (Failures Only) *Source: references/severity-guidance.md*

  1. Determine Impact: Use ASVS Chapter baseline (e.g., Auth = High).
  2. Mark: ❌ FAIL (Evidence: missing:<feature> or location of bypass).

⚙️ Execution Flow

Phase 1: Setup & Context

  1. Path Resolution (Critical):

- Skill Workspace: Directory containing this SKILL.md and assets/. Use this path ONLY to load the CSV and references. - Target Repo: The user's application codebase. Use this path for ALL code analysis, file searching, and git commands.

  1. Context Gathering:

- Profile Stack: Identify language, framework (load defaults from references/framework-defaults.md), and database. - Git Metadata: Run git rev-parse --short HEAD in the Target Repo. - Structure: Detect monorepo structure. Prefix evidence with [component] if multiple exist.

  1. Load Canonical Assets:

- Load CSV from Skill Workspace assets/OWASP_Application_Security_Verification_Standard_5.0.0_L1_en.csv. - Use columns and row order (1-70) for the audit. - Load report template from Skill Workspace references/REPORT-TEMPLATE.md. DO NOT deviate from template while generating the report.

Phase 2: Evaluate (Chapter by Chapter)

Iterate through the CSV (maintain order 1-70). Apply the Decision Tree to each item.

  • Process: Batch independent searches. Use grep first; read_file only on matches.
  • Large Files: If >500 lines, read only head/tail.
  • Persistence: Save findings to internal list. Do not re-read files across chapters.

Phase 3: Reporting

  1. Parse Report: Use references/REPORT-TEMPLATE.md as the mandatory skeleton.

- Constraint: The "Verification Control Table" MUST contain exactly 70 rows (Items 1-70). - Findings: Include detailed evidence/remediation for FAIL items only. - Sanitization: Ensure NO secrets/PII are present.

  1. Write to Disk: Save to {project_name}-ASVS-L1-audit-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md in one operation.
  2. Completion: Output coverage statistics and confirm file location.

Error Handling

ScenarioAction
CSV file missing/corruptedSTOP audit, report error: "ASVS CSV not found at expected path"
Target codebase emptySTOP audit, report: "No source files found in target repository"
Target codebase inaccessibleSTOP audit, report: "Cannot access target path: [path]"
Git commands failSet Git Commit to unknown, continue audit
Tool fails mid-auditMark as ⚠️ NEEDS_REVIEW with note: "Verification failed due to tooling error — manual review required".
Token/context limit approachingComplete current chapter, save partial report with [PARTIAL] prefix, note last completed item
File too large to readSample first 500 lines + last 100 lines, note in Evidence: "Large file - sampled"

Examples

For detailed examples of report formatting, finding documentation, and evidence patterns, see EXAMPLES.md.

平台分布

Codex

36.49%
按下载量换算52

Claude

31.58%
按下载量换算45

Cursor

16.78%
按下载量换算24

Gemini CLI

9.48%
按下载量换算14

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills