security-code-audit

Current release: v1.1.0

Code security audit skill for web/API, backend, full-stack, smart-contract, and artifact-centric repositories.

security-code-audit is designed for code security review, SAST-style analysis, OWASP-style checks, dependency auditing, smart-contract review, artifact and prompt-surface review, and remediation retest. It focuses on real code, exploitability, bounded tracing, persistent audit state, and high-signal reporting instead of shallow pattern matching.

Chinese documentation: README-CN.md

1. Usage

• /security-code-audit Default full audit. Equivalent to standard single.
• /security-code-audit quick Fast high-risk triage.
• /security-code-audit deep Exhaustive review with stronger verification and attack-chain depth.
• /security-code-audit regression Retest the latest report and verify whether fixes actually hold.
• /security-code-audit help Show parameters, modes, execution options, and examples.

Parameters:

• depth: quick | standard | deep | regression
• execution: single | multi
• multi is beta and falls back to single if the host cannot delegate

Examples:

• /security-code-audit deep multi
• /security-code-audit regression
• /security-code-audit deep --agents=multi

2. Core Capabilities

• Target-aware routing Recon selects a target profile first, then routes into the right knowledge domain and shared modules for the observed surface.
• Real-code focus Findings are expected to be tied to actual file locations, exploit paths, and concrete minimal fixes.
• Bounded tracing Bidirectional tracing keeps source-to-sink and state-transition analysis focused on real trust-boundary crossings instead of unbounded graph expansion.
• Repeated-pattern enumeration The skill is built to find all materially affected locations, not just the first hit.
• Audit-state continuity .security-code-audit-state/ stores compact run context, code fact snapshots, evidence observations, loaded-module decisions, function-chain records, and invalidations so every run can re-orient cleanly.
• Dependency and artifact coverage Application code, dependencies, markdown and prompt artifacts, API specs, notebooks, config, and IaC surfaces all fit into the same audit flow.
• Honest coverage reporting Partial, blocked, or invalidated review areas are carried forward as coverage debt instead of being reported as fully covered.
• Evidence-gated findings Main findings stay limited to confirmed issues, while unresolved high-signal cases remain visible as candidate signals or working hypotheses instead of being silently dropped.
• Shape hints with evidence gates Reference modules now include concise risk-shape examples for common application and smart-contract failures. These examples are prompts for investigation, not signatures; every finding still requires attacker influence, a reachable failed boundary or invariant, missing effective controls, and concrete impact.
• 2025 incident-pattern coverage Smart-contract guidance now covers DeFi/DEX/lending/bridge, upgradeable, signer, frontend transaction-builder, relayer, admin, and supply-chain paths when they can affect on-chain assets, authority, signatures, or upgrades.
• History and regression support Findings are compared against .security-code-audit-reports/, and regression mode can retest the latest report directly after a fresh current-state pass or report-baseline selection.
• Optional multi-agent execution multi can widen coverage for large repos while keeping a single reporting path.

3. Architecture

Runtime architecture: staged scanning with mode policy, execution topology, state freshness checks, profile routing, advisory code facts, evidence observation routing, lazy loading, bounded tracing, and persistent state.

flowchart TD
    A["User command<br/>/security-code-audit [mode] [execution]"]
    B["SKILL.md<br/>entry router + shared workflow"]
    MP["Mode policy<br/>quick | standard | deep | regression<br/>scope, depth, stop conditions"]
    C["Bootstrap control plane<br/>parse mode and execution<br/>load core, execution, mode rules"]
    X["Execution topology<br/>single | multi<br/>ownership, sharding, worker contract, merge"]

    ST[".security-code-audit-state<br/>machine-readable continuity state"]
    SR["State reader<br/>freshness, invalidation,<br/>continuation, merge hints<br/>not safety proof"]

    D["Recon phase<br/>map repo surface, stack, artifacts,<br/>claims, risk areas, and state freshness"]
    RUI["core/untrusted-repo-input.md<br/>repo docs, comments, old reports,<br/>and claims are hints only"]
    PC["core/project-context.md<br/>verified claims, business invariants,<br/>trust-boundary assumptions,<br/>deployment assumptions, change themes"]
    CF["core/surface-profile.md<br/>surface profile + state indexes<br/>entrypoints, routes, sinks,<br/>state transitions, artifacts, limitations"]
    CB["Audit context bundle<br/>observed surfaces, business assets,<br/>invariants, trust boundaries,<br/>code facts, limitations, invalidations"]

    E["Profile selection<br/>application | smart-contract | artifact-centric"]
    F["core/loading.md<br/>lazy loading + on-demand routing"]
    G["Primary knowledge domain<br/>application | smart-contract"]
    H["Shared modules<br/>artifacts, dependencies, tooling,<br/>reporting, and state standards"]
    T["Core quality controls<br/>integrity, coverage, findings,<br/>severity, fingerprints, tracing"]
    Q["core/deep-semantic-controls.md<br/>deep, multi, or complex high-risk surfaces"]
    U["Optional advisory tooling<br/>command-resolution.md<br/>scanner evidence and command context,<br/>not the audit backbone"]

    I["Hypothesis-driven audit pass<br/>generate, validate, falsify, bound<br/>current-code discovery depth controlled by mode"]
    EO["Evidence observation envelope<br/>raw observations, tool output,<br/>blockers, negative evidence,<br/>schema gaps, custom signals"]
    J["Evidence and consolidation<br/>route observations, validate findings,<br/>dedupe repeats, reconcile coverage,<br/>tools, gates, obligations"]
    HM["Historical miss gate<br/>reopen prior findings against current code<br/>before lifecycle labels"]
    K["Reporting and regression<br/>write findings, compare history, retest fixes"]

    R[".security-code-audit-reports<br/>human-readable findings and history"]

    A --> B
    B --> MP
    B --> C
    C --> X
    ST -. read .-> SR
    SR -. freshness and invalidation .-> D
    SR -. continuation and open obligations .-> CB
    SR -. merge ledgers and coverage state .-> J
    MP --> D
    X --> D
    RUI --> D
    D --> PC
    D --> CF
    PC --> CB
    CF --> CB
    CB --> E
    E --> F
    F --> G
    F --> H
    F --> T
    F --> Q
    H --> U
    MP --> I
    X --> I
    G --> I
    H --> I
    T --> I
    Q -. conditional semantic controls .-> I
    U -. optional scanner evidence .-> I
    U -. tool-output observations and blockers .-> EO
    I --> EO
    EO --> J
    J --> HM
    HM --> K
    K --> R
    X -. persist topology and merge inputs .-> ST
    D -. persist run context .-> ST
    PC -. persist project context .-> ST
    CF -. persist code facts and limitations .-> ST
    F -. persist selected modules .-> ST
    U -. persist command probes and blockers .-> ST
    EO -. preserve observations before routing .-> ST
    I -. update traces, tools, gates, coverage .-> ST
    J -. persist hypotheses, obligations, invalidations .-> ST
    HM -. persist historical misses or lifecycle allowance .-> ST
    R -. regression input only .-> K

Loading

State reader is a conceptual operation: read prior state, summarize freshness / invalidation, continuation / open obligations, and coverage / merge hints, then use those hints without treating them as proof. It is not a new runtime file, schema, service, or platform component.

The skill is intentionally split into layers:

Path	Purpose
SKILL.md	Router, help path, shared workflow, and progress rules
core/	Integrity, coverage, findings, severity, project context, lazy loading, surface profiles, advisory code facts, bidirectional tracing, and deep semantic controls
execution/	Single-agent and beta multi-agent topology, worker contracts, sharding, and merge rules
profiles/	Post-recon target semantics: application, smart-contract, or artifact-centric
references/application/	Primary methodology for web/API/backend audits
references/smart-contract/	Primary methodology for Solidity and on-chain audits
references/shared/	Shared artifact, dependency, tooling, reporting, and audit-state standards
modes/	quick, standard, deep, and regression depth contracts

Output layers:

Path	Purpose
.security-code-audit-reports/	Human-readable findings, history, regression baselines, and action items
.security-code-audit-state/	Machine-readable run context, surface inventories, project context, code fact snapshots, evidence observations, tool invocation records, deep gate ledgers, function chains, hypotheses, and invalidations for every run