BC testing-oauth2-implementation-flaws
Tests OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect implementations for authorization code interception, redirect URI manipulation, CSRF in OAuth flows, token leakage, scope escalation, and PKCE bypass, using Burp Suite Professional and the EsPReSSO extension to probe the authorization server, client, and token handling. Use when assessing OAuth2/OIDC flows or SSO systems for misconfigurations enabling account takeover.
Tests OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect implementations for authorization code interception, redirect URI manipulation, CSRF in OAuth flows, token leakage, scope…
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — 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 · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
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" - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 268, 302): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 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
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4144 tokens
- 100Steps. 29 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
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 406: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 15 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 29 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.