BB anti-reversing-techniques
AUTHORIZED USE ONLY: This skill contains dual-use security techniques. Before proceeding with any bypass or analysis: > 1.
AUTHORIZED USE ONLY: This skill contains dual-use security techniques.
As a process B 68/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, failures and branches, progress reporting
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: anti-reversing-techniques (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills)
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 · 5
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 5
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityresources/implementation-playbook.md:7Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)Understanding protection mechanisms encountered during authorized software analysis, security research, and malware analysis. This knowledge helps analysts bypass protections to complete legitimate an
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityresources/implementation-playbook.md:531Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Malware analysis (defensive)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:24Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)> 1. **Verify authorization**: Confirm you have explicit written permission from the software owner, or are operating within a legitimate security context (CTF, authorized pentest, malware analysis, s
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:28Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)> **Legitimate use cases**: Malware analysis, authorized penetration testing, CTF competitions, academic security research, analyzing software you own/have rights to
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:33Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Conducting malware analysis or security research in scope
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "risk" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "date_added"
Process rating: all ten parameters 68/100
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 17 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 748 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 122: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 6 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 17 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 77.