hoangnguyen0403/common-exploit-verification
skills/common/common-exploit-verification/SKILL.md
Enforce "No Exploit, No Report" policy with PoC construction standards, false-positive filtering, and evidence collection per vulnerability class across backend, frontend, and mobile. Use when validating security findings, constructing exploit proofs, filtering false positives, or writing pentest findings.
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard common-exploit-verificationInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Jul 15, 2026, 3:24 AM228.0s4 files scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- common-exploit-verification
- description:
- Enforce "No Exploit, No Report" policy with PoC construction standards, false-positive filtering, and evidence collection per vulnerability class across backend, frontend, and mobile. Use when validating security findings, constructing exploit proofs, filtering false positives, or writing pentest findings.
Exploit Verification Standard
Priority: P0 (CRITICAL)
Always-Apply Rules
- No Exploit = No Report: Finding without reproducible PoC is discarded. No exceptions.
- No Theoretical Findings: "This could be exploited if..." → rejected. Demonstrate actual impact.
- No Tool Output as Evidence: Scanner output alone insufficient. Manual verification required.
PoC Construction
Every confirmed finding must include all fields:
ID: [unique identifier]
Vulnerability: [CWE-XXX: type name]
Platform: [backend|frontend|mobile-ios|mobile-android]
Component: [file:line or endpoint]
Severity: [Critical|High|Medium|Low] (CVSS: X.X)
OWASP: [mapping — e.g., A03:2021, API1:2023, M4:2024]
-- Proof of Concept --
Preconditions: [required state, auth level, config]
Steps:
1. [exact step with command/payload]
2. [expected vs actual result]
Payload: [exact input — copy-paste ready]
Evidence: [response body, status code, data returned]
-- Impact --
Impact: [what attacker gains — data, access, control]
Blast Radius: [lateral movement, escalation paths]
-- Remediation --
Fix: [specific code change, not generic advice]
Validation Gate
| Result | Action | Criteria | |---|---|---| | ✅ Confirmed | Include in report | PoC reproduces, impact demonstrated | | ⚠️ Conditional | Include with conditions | Requires specific config/timing/race | | ❌ Unconfirmed | Discard | Cannot reproduce despite 3 attempts | | 🔄 Degraded | Downgrade severity | Partial impact, mitigating controls exist |
False Positive Filters
See false-positive-checklist for platform-specific filters.
Quick checks before reporting:
- SAST-only finding: Is the flagged code actually reachable from user input? Trace full data flow.
- Scanner noise: Does the "vulnerability" have compensating controls (WAF, middleware, framework defaults)?
- Version mismatch: Is the CVE for a function the project actually uses (reachability analysis)?
- Client-side only: Is the "bypass" only client-side while server enforces correctly?
Anti-Patterns
- No severity inflation: Missing header ≠ Critical. CVSS score must match demonstrated impact.
- No duplicate findings: Same root cause across endpoints = 1 finding with multiple affected components.
- No remediation without specificity: "Use parameterized queries" → include the exact code change for the affected file.
References
- False Positive Checklist — platform-specific false positive filters
- Exploit Playbook — PoC templates per vulnerability class (backend, frontend, mobile)
Related Skills
hoangnguyen0403/common-operator-profile
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Infer the requesting operator's technical fluency from message content (never ask directly) and adapt register — business, hybrid, or technical — across SDLC workflow output. Use when starting sdlc, brainstorm-feature, plan-feature, verify-work, publish-notes, or session-report, or whenever a request's phrasing signals a non-technical or cross-stack operator.
524SKILL.mdUpdated Jul 12, 2026
hoangnguyen0403/database-transactions
documentation
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Define transaction boundaries, locking, and consistency guarantees for multi-step writes. Use when designing atomic operations, retries, idempotency, or concurrent write behavior.
524SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 19, 2026
hoangnguyen0403/database-schema-design
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Design relational or document schemas from access patterns, cardinality, and lifecycle. Use when modeling entities, choosing embed vs normalize, or shaping schema boundaries before implementation.
524SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 19, 2026
hoangnguyen0403/database-query-performance
data-ai
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Diagnose database latency with explain plans, index ownership, and query-shape review. Use when a query is slow, an index is missing, or scans and N+1 patterns appear.
524SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 19, 2026