CB performing-cloud-penetration-testing-with-pacu
Run authorized AWS penetration tests with Pacu, the open-source AWS exploitation framework, to enumerate IAM configuration, scan for privilege escalation paths, and test data access and lateral movement using compromised credentials. Use when conducting authorized red-team assessments of AWS environments, validating IAM policies and SCPs, or determining the blast radius of compromised AWS credentials.
Run authorized AWS penetration tests with Pacu, the open-source AWS exploitation framework, to enumerate IAM configuration, scan for privilege escalation…
As a process B 68/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: 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 · 9
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 9
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# API Reference: Performing Cloud Penetration Testing with Pacu
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:17Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)| `iam__privesc_scan` | Scan for 21+ privilege escalation vectors |
detector -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:64Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- [Rhino Security: AWS Privilege Escalation](https://rhinosecuritylabs.com/aws/aws-privilege-escalation-methods-mitigation/)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:65Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- [AWS Penetration Testing Policy](https://aws.amazon.com/security/penetration-testing/)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:4Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)framework, to enumerate IAM configuration, scan for privilege escalation paths, and
detector -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:5Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)test data access and lateral movement using compromised credentials. Use when conducting
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:35Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Performing Cloud Penetration Testing with Pacu
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:39Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- When conducting authorized penetration testing of AWS environments
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:43Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- When building red team exercises against AWS cloud infrastructure
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_csf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"
Process rating: all ten parameters 68/100
- 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
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 24 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2631 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 404: 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.