CC reverse-engineering-ransomware-encryption-routine
Reverse engineer ransomware encryption routines to identify cryptographic algorithms, key generation flaws, and potential decryption opportunities using static and dynamic analysis.
Reverse engineer ransomware encryption routines to identify cryptographic algorithms, key generation flaws, and potential decryption opportunities using…
As a process C 54/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, running it twice
How to improve
For the model run — optional
- 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 · 14
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 14
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityassets/template.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Ransomware Encryption Analysis Report
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# API Reference: Reverse Engineering Ransomware Encryption
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:21Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)## Ransomware Encryption Patterns
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:30Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)## Common Ransomware Crypto
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/api-reference.md:50Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- ID Ransomware: https://id-ransomware.malwarehunterteam.com/
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/standards.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Ransomware Encryption Standards Reference
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/standards.md:30Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- [ID Ransomware](https://id-ransomware.malwarehunterteam.com/)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/workflows.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Ransomware Encryption Analysis Workflows
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/workflows.md:5Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)[Ransomware Sample] --> [Import Analysis] --> [Find Crypto APIs]
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:2Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)name: reverse-engineering-ransomware-encryption-routine
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:3Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)description: Reverse engineer ransomware encryption routines to identify cryptographic
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:9Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- ransomware
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:56Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Reverse Engineering Ransomware Encryption Routine
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:60Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)Modern ransomware uses hybrid encryption combining symmetric algorithms (AES-256-CBC/CTR, ChaCha20, Salsa20) for file encryption with asymmetric algorithms (RSA-2048/4096, Curve25519) for key protecti
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" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_f3"
Process rating: all ten parameters 54/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 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
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web, python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 22 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2494 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
- +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 181: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 22 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.