CC auditing-uefi-firmware-with-chipsec
Use Intel CHIPSEC to assess platform firmware configuration, SPI flash write protection, BIOS lock, SMM/SMRR, and Secure Boot variable state, dump SPI flash, and triage UEFI variables for firmware-level threats.
Use Intel CHIPSEC to assess platform firmware configuration, SPI flash write protection, BIOS lock, SMM/SMRR, and Secure Boot variable state, dump SPI flash…
As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, failures and branches
How to improve
- 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 · 3
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 3
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegescripts/agent.py:14Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (string literal in code, not executed)sudo python agent.py baseline --log chipsec.log --json report.json
code literal -
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegescripts/agent.py:15Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (string literal in code, not executed)sudo python agent.py module --name common.bios_wp
code literal -
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegescripts/agent.py:16Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (string literal in code, not executed)sudo python agent.py dump --out rom.bin
code literal
Files scanned: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "domain" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "subdomain" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "nist_csf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"
Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 31 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2203 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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -42 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
- +3Description length 211: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 18 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 31 items
- +4Has examples (8 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.