Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 开发

secrets(secrets 开发)

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。

secrets 是开发类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在开发类的 21,746 个 Skill 里排第 7,110。

总安装 4,054周安装 164GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 1,273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
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

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:secrets(secrets 开发)
来源仓库:https://github.com/mike47512/secrets
安装命令:
openclaw skills install secrets
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install secrets

这个 Skill 是做什么的

开发类 Skill 面向写代码、改代码和排查问题,一般会读写仓库文件,部分还会执行构建或测试命令。

secrets 深入讲解 secrets 全生命周期管理流程,包括分类、存储、轮换与应急响应。适用于 DevOps 团队设计企业级密钥管理体系或应对合规审计要求。提供开发人员友好的人机交互建议,平衡安全性与开发效率之间的关系。强调最小权限原则与自动化轮换机制,减少人为失误导致的数据泄露概率。

事件响应部分包含检测、遏制、根除与恢复四阶段操作指南,需定期演练验证有效性。

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 OpenClaw;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 openclaw skills install secrets;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

secrets 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install secrets。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

secrets 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。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。

secrets 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。

secrets 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

secrets 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 4,054 次,近一周安装 164 次,下载 1,273 次。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。

secrets 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

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 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。
  • 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 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理开发类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

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。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

开发类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
skill-vetter

技能审查员 · OpenClaw

8,779,018986操作浏览器MIT-0通过
ontology

本体论 · OpenClaw

6,636,960576只读MIT-0通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

6,631,872764接触敏感数据未明确通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

3,757,680201接触敏感数据未明确通过
nano-banana-pro

纳米香蕉专业版 · OpenClaw

3,526,898364接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒
secrets

secrets 开发 · 本页

4,054—接触敏感数据MIT-0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

name
secrets
description
Deep workflow for secrets lifecycle—classification, storage (Vault/KMS/cloud), rotation, least privilege, developer ergonomics, audit, and incident response. Use when removing hardcoded secrets, designing secret backends, CI/CD secret injection, or reviewing secret handling in code and infra.

Secrets Management (Deep Workflow)

Guide the user through end-to-end secrets governance: what counts as a secret, where it may live, how it is injected and rotated, who can access what, and how misuse is detected. Act as a structured reviewer and architect, not a checklist robot.

When to Offer This Workflow

Trigger conditions:

  • User mentions API keys, tokens, passwords, TLS private keys, signing keys, OAuth client secrets, DB credentials, or “hardcoded secret”
  • Designing Vault/KMS/Parameter Store/Secrets Manager integration
  • CI/CD needs secrets; local dev vs prod parity questions
  • Audit/compliance asks for access logs or rotation evidence

Initial offer:

Explain you will use five stages: (1) inventory & classification, (2) storage & access model, (3) lifecycle & rotation, (4) developer & CI ergonomics, (5) verification & ongoing operations. Ask if they want this full pass or a narrower slice (e.g., “rotate one class of keys”).

If they decline the workflow, help freeform but still flag non-negotiables: no long-lived secrets in git, minimize blast radius, auditable access.


Stage 1: Inventory & Classification

Goal: Know what exists, where it is, who needs it, and blast radius if leaked.

Questions to Ask

  1. What environments exist (local, staging, prod, partner)? Are boundaries strict?
  2. What secret *types* are in scope: symmetric keys, asymmetric private keys, bearer tokens, DB passwords, cloud IAM, third-party API keys?
  3. Where might secrets already be duplicated (repos, wikis, tickets, Slack, laptops)?
  4. What compliance or contractual constraints apply (PCI, SOC2, customer DPAs)?

Actions

  • Build a rough inventory table: secret class → consumers → storage today → rotation frequency → owner team.
  • Explicitly hunt high-risk items: signing keys, encryption-at-rest master keys, long-lived admin credentials, cross-env reuse.
  • Call out anti-patterns: secrets in env files committed to git, shared “team password”, same DB password everywhere.

Exit Condition

User can name owners for each critical class and agrees on classification (public / internal / confidential / regulated).

Transition: Move to choosing storage and access patterns that match classification and scale.


Stage 2: Storage & Access Model

Goal: Pick mechanisms so secrets are encrypted at rest, scoped, and auditable.

Design Points

  • Central secret store vs cloud-native (e.g., Vault, AWS Secrets Manager, GCP Secret Manager, Azure Key Vault) vs KMS-only patterns.
  • Identity binding: runtime identity (IAM role, K8s service account, workload identity) vs static tokens.
  • Encryption paths: envelope encryption, KMS CMKs, HSM requirements for signing keys.
  • Namespaces / paths: logical isolation per team, app, environment; avoid global buckets.

Trade-offs to Surface

  • Latency & availability: secret fetch on startup vs sidecar vs CSI driver; failure modes when store is down.
  • Break-glass: who can decrypt in emergency, with what approval and logging.
  • Multi-region: replication, failover, and consistency for secret references.

Exit Condition

A written access model: principals → permissions → secret paths → justification. No “everyone read/write production.”

Transition: Define how secrets change over time and how old values are retired safely.


Stage 3: Lifecycle & Rotation

Goal: Secrets expire, rotate, and revoke without surprise outages.

Workflow

  1. Rotation policy per class: automatic vs manual, max age, overlap window.
  2. Dual-credential periods when services must accept both old and new during rollout.
  3. Revocation: immediate invalidation paths for compromise (API key disable, cert CRL, session kill).
  4. Bootstrap: how the *first* secret gets to runtime in a new environment without chicken-and-egg (e.g., cloud IAM → fetch others).

Pitfalls to Call Out

  • Rotating DB password without connection pool drain → thundering reconnect failures.
  • Clients caching JWT signing keys without key ID rotation support.
  • Secrets embedded in container images or build artifacts.

Exit Condition

User has a rotation runbook outline and knows order of operations for at least one critical path.

Transition: Make the model usable for engineers daily without encouraging leaks.


Stage 4: Developer & CI Ergonomics

Goal: Correct behavior is the default; wrong behavior is hard or blocked.

Practices

  • Local dev: short-lived dev credentials, personal sandboxes, .env.example without values, secret scanners in pre-commit/CI.
  • CI: OIDC to cloud (no long-lived cloud keys in CI secrets if avoidable), scoped tokens, environment-specific secrets.
  • Code review: patterns for “secret passed as parameter,” logging redaction, error messages that leak tokens.

Tooling Mentions (when relevant)

  • Git secret scanning (e.g., gitleaks, trufflehog), dependency on org policy.
  • Dynamic secrets / database roles if using Vault-style patterns.

Exit Condition

Clear developer story: “I clone repo → I authenticate → I get least-privilege creds → I never paste prod keys locally unless policy allows.”

Transition: Prove the design works and stays healthy over time.


Stage 5: Verification & Operations

Goal: Evidence that controls work; readiness when things go wrong.

Verification

  • Drills: restore from backup of secret metadata (if applicable), rotate in staging with full integration tests.
  • Audit review: sample access logs; alert on anomalous read patterns.
  • Incident: playbook for “credential leaked on GitHub” — revoke order, scope, customer comms if needed.

Metrics / Signals (examples)

  • Failed authentication spikes after rotation
  • Secret fetch error rates from apps
  • Time-to-revoke for a simulated leak

Exit Condition

User can answer: “If this key leaks at 3am, what is step 1–5 and who is paged?”


Final Review Checklist

  • [ ] No production secrets in source control or public artifacts
  • [ ] Least privilege enforced at identity + path + operation level
  • [ ] Rotation and revocation paths documented with owners
  • [ ] CI and local dev paths do not encourage static prod credentials
  • [ ] Audit/logging aligned with organizational requirements

Tips for Effective Guidance

  • Prefer concrete sequences (bootstrap → fetch → use → rotate) over abstract “use a vault.”
  • Always ask blast radius and who can decrypt.
  • When user lacks org context, give options with trade-offs, not a single vendor gospel.

Handling Deviations

  • “We only need one API key”: still classify, store centrally, and set expiry where possible.
  • “Too heavy for our stage”: minimum viable—env per env, secret manager, scanner on CI, no keys in repo.

平台分布

OpenClaw

70.76%
按下载量换算901

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

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