BC fix-security-vulnerabilities-with-strix
Fix security vulnerabilities found by a Strix pentest (open-source CLI or app.strix.ai cloud) — triage by severity, patch the root cause rather than the symptom, and re-run Strix to prove each fix actually closes the exploit. Handles injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control, IDOR, and other validated findings. Use after a Strix scan reports findings, or when the user asks to remediate, patch, or fix security issues from a strix_runs report, vulnerabilities.json, findings.sarif, or a cloud scan.
Fix security vulnerabilities found by a Strix pentest (open-source CLI or app.strix.ai cloud) — triage by severity, patch the root cause rather than the…
As a process C 57/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, 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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:3Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)description: Fix security vulnerabilities found by a Strix pentest (open-source CLI or app.strix.ai cloud) — triage by severity, patch the root cause rather than the symptom, and re-run Strix to prove
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:21Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **Cloud (app.strix.ai)** — pull findings with the CLI: `strix cloud vulns list --scan-id <scan-id> --json` (or `strix cloud scans get <scan-id> --json | jq '.vulnerabilities'`, or `strix cloud vulns
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 57/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 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
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 10 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1326 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (4 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 502: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 5 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.