CC exploiting-active-directory-certificate-services-esc1
Exploit misconfigured Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS) ESC1 vulnerability to request certificates as high-privileged users and escalate domain privileges during authorized red team assessments.
Exploit misconfigured Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS) ESC1 vulnerability to request certificates as high-privileged users and escalate domain…
As a process C 54/100 · 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 · 6
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 6
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/workflows.md:25Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)4. Privilege Escalation
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:5Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)privileges during authorized red team assessments.
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:47Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- When conducting red team exercises or penetration testing engagements
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:52Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Familiarity with red teaming concepts and tools
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:126Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)### Phase 4: Domain Privilege Escalation
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:151Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Mimikatz | Credential dumping post-escalation | Windows |
Files scanned: 8. 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 "d3fend_techniques" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "nist_csf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"
Process rating: all ten parameters 54/100
- 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
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 42 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1781 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
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
- -43 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
- -32 of 2 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 206: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 15 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 42 items
- +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.