BC implementing-attack-surface-management
Implements external attack surface management (EASM) using Shodan, Censys, and ProjectDiscovery tools (subfinder, httpx, nuclei) for asset discovery, subdomain enumeration, service fingerprinting, and exposure scoring. Includes a weighted risk scoring algorithm based on OWASP attack surface analysis methodology and the Relative Attack Surface Quotient (RSQ). Use when building continuous ASM programs or performing external reconnaissance for security assessments.
Implements external attack surface management (EASM) using Shodan, Censys, and ProjectDiscovery tools (subfinder, httpx, nuclei) for asset discovery…
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/asm-reference.md:144Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- 445 (SMB): Ransomware propagation vector
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:41Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- When performing authorized external reconnaissance for penetration testing engagements
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 54/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 17 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1576 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
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
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 466: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 17 items
- +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.