BB implementing-api-key-security-controls
Implements secure API key generation with sufficient entropy, server-side hashing (SHA-256/bcrypt) instead of plaintext storage, per-key scoping to endpoints/IPs/rate limits, zero-downtime rotation, and automated leak monitoring across GitHub repos, logs, and client-side code. Use when designing API key formats, building key rotation or revocation workflows, or protecting server-to-server API credentials from leakage, brute force, and abuse.
Implements secure API key generation with sufficient entropy, server-side hashing (SHA-256/bcrypt) instead of plaintext storage, per-key scoping to…
As a process B 70/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: failures and branches, running it twice, progress reporting
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Exfiltration
net-credential-usereferences/api-reference.md:40Credential used in a network call (verify the destination is the intended service) (documentation of a security skill)curl -H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" \
security skill -
low Secrets in code
secret-password-literalSKILL.md:253Hard-coded password / key literal (may be an example)api_key = auth_header[7:]
Files scanned: 4. 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_ai_rmf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "atlas_techniques" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "nist_csf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"
Process rating: all ten parameters 70/100
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 1 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. 28 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3718 tokens
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 445: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 12 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 28 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (5 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.