CC performing-external-network-penetration-test
Conduct a comprehensive external network penetration test to identify vulnerabilities in internet-facing infrastructure using PTES methodology, reconnaissance, scanning, exploitation, and reporting.
Conduct a comprehensive external network penetration test to identify vulnerabilities in internet-facing infrastructure using PTES methodology…
As a process C 51/100 · 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 · 18
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 18
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityassets/template.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# External Network Penetration Test — Report Template
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityassets/template.md:8Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Assessment Type | External Network Penetration Test |
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityassets/template.md:14Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Authorization ID | [PENTEST-YYYY-EXT-NNN] |
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityassets/template.md:21Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)[Organization Name] engaged [Testing Company] to perform an external network penetration test against its internet-facing infrastructure. The assessment was conducted between [dates] following the PTE
detector -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityassets/template.md:95Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- PTES (Penetration Testing Execution Standard)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# API Reference — Performing External Network Penetration Test
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/standards.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Standards and Frameworks — External Network Penetration Testing
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/standards.md:5Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)### PTES (Penetration Testing Execution Standard)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/standards.md:6Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Website: http://www.pentest-standard.org/
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/standards.md:8Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Best for: Comprehensive network penetration testing engagements
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/standards.md:26Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Framework | Requirement | Pentest Frequency |
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/workflows.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Workflows — External Network Penetration Testing
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/workflows.md:33Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)6. Attempt lateral movement from compromised hosts
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:3Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)description: Conduct a comprehensive external network penetration test to identify
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:9Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- external-pentest
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:34Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Performing External Network Penetration Test
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:38Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)An external network penetration test simulates a real-world attacker targeting an organization's internet-facing assets such as firewalls, web servers, mail servers, DNS servers, VPN gateways, and clo
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:43Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- When conducting security assessments that involve performing external network penetration test
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 "nist_csf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"
Process rating: all ten parameters 51/100
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 14 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2473 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 12 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 198: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 24 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 14 items
- +4Has examples (10 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.