SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

CB analyzing-security-logs-with-splunk

Leverages Splunk Enterprise Security and SPL (Search Processing Language) to investigate security incidents through log correlation, timeline reconstruction, and anomaly detection. Covers Windows event logs, firewall logs, proxy logs, and authentication data analysis. Activates for requests involving Splunk investigation, SPL queries, SIEM log analysis, security event correlation, or log-based incident investigation.

mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills Agent Skills author: mukul975 Apache-2.0 4 files · 1 script body ≈ 2 243 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 5 d ago

Leverages Splunk Enterprise Security and SPL (Search Processing Language) to investigate security incidents through log correlation, timeline reconstruction…

As a process B 72/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: failures and branches, running it twice

AnalyzerSecuritytype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
C
89/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
94
Quality 40%
82
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
72/100
Nearly there
Failures and branches w 10
0
Running it twice w 4
30
When it triggers w 12
50
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 6

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 6
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/api-reference.md:76
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      | Lateral movement | `index=windows EventCode=4624 Logon_Type=3 \| stats dc(host) by src_ip` |
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:59
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      - Analyzing authentication anomalies, lateral movement, or data exfiltration patterns
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:106
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
      | Detect lateral movement via RDP
      detector
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:132
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
      | Detect LSASS credential dumping
      detector
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:228
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      4. Search for lateral movement from the compromised account (Event ID 4624 Type 3 to other hosts)
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:256
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      4. [timestamp] - Lateral movement to SRV-FILE01 (Event 4624 Type 3)

    Files scanned: 4. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "domain"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "subdomain"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "atlas_techniques"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "d3fend_techniques"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "nist_ai_rmf"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "nist_csf"

    Process rating: all ten parameters 72/100

    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 24 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2243 tokens
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • -41 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
    • -31 of 1 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +3Description length 420: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 15 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 24 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.