external/trailofbits-security/trailmark/skills/trailmark-structural/SKILL.md
Runs full Trailmark structural analysis by building a graph, running `preanalysis()`, and reporting hotspots, taint, blast radius, privilege boundaries, attack surface, and version-gated Trailmark 0.4+/0.5+ data such as proxy counts, subgraph edges, type/reference summaries, and entrypoint attributes. Use when vivisect needs detailed structural data for a target. Triggers: structural analysis, blast radius, taint analysis, complexity hotspots, proxy nodes, type references.
npx skillsauth add seikaikyo/dash-skills trailmark-structuralInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Builds a Trailmark graph and runs engine.preanalysis() to compute all
four pre-analysis passes. The core workflow is v0.2-safe; v0.4-only details
are included only after checking method availability, and newer builds
enrich the same output (0.5.0+ adds an attributes key to attack-surface
entries and proxy.external:* nodes from .trailmark/links.toml) without
any workflow change.
trailmark-summary instead)trailmark skill directly)| Rationalization | Why It's Wrong | Required Action |
|-----------------|----------------|-----------------|
| "Summary analysis is enough" | Summary skips taint, blast radius, and privilege boundary data | Run full structural analysis when detailed data is needed |
| "One pass is sufficient" | Passes cross-reference each other — taint without blast radius misses critical nodes | Run all four passes |
| "Tool isn't installed, I'll analyze manually" | Manual analysis misses what tooling catches | Report "trailmark is not installed" and return |
| "Empty pass output means the pass failed" | Some passes produce no data for some codebases (e.g., no privilege boundaries) | Return full output regardless |
| "A v0.4 field is always present" | Users may still have Trailmark 0.2.x installed | Probe with hasattr() before querying v0.4-only methods |
The target directory is passed via the args parameter.
Step 1: Check that trailmark is available.
trailmark analyze --help 2>/dev/null || \
uv run trailmark analyze --help 2>/dev/null
If neither command works, report "trailmark is not installed"
and return. Do NOT run pip install, uv pip install,
git clone, or any install command. The user must install
trailmark themselves.
Optionally record the version:
trailmark --version 2>/dev/null || uv run trailmark --version 2>/dev/null || true
Do not fail if this command is missing; use API feature probes below.
Step 2: Detect languages with Trailmark's parse API.
python3 - "{args}" <<'PY'
import json
import sys
try:
from trailmark.parse import detect_languages # canonical location since 0.3.x
except ModuleNotFoundError:
# v0.2.x predates trailmark.parse; the same function lives in query.api
from trailmark.query.api import detect_languages
print(json.dumps(detect_languages(sys.argv[1])))
PY
If the import fails, rerun the same snippet with uv run python - "{args}".
If the result is [], report "Trailmark found no supported languages under
target" and return.
Step 3: Run the full structural analysis via QueryEngine.
Run this snippet with python3. If the import fails, rerun the same snippet
under uv run python - "{args}".
python3 - "{args}" <<'PY'
import json
import sys
try:
from trailmark.parse import detect_languages # canonical location since 0.3.x
except ModuleNotFoundError:
# v0.2.x predates trailmark.parse; the same function lives in query.api
from trailmark.query.api import detect_languages
from trailmark.query.api import QueryEngine
target = sys.argv[1]
languages = detect_languages(target)
engine = QueryEngine.from_directory(target, language="auto")
preanalysis = engine.preanalysis()
def summarize_subgraph(name: str, limit: int = 25) -> dict[str, object]:
nodes = engine.subgraph(name)
summary = {
"count": len(nodes),
"sample_ids": [node["id"] for node in nodes[:limit]],
}
if hasattr(engine, "subgraph_edges"):
summary["edge_count"] = len(engine.subgraph_edges(name))
return summary
graph = json.loads(engine.to_json())
nodes = graph.get("nodes", {})
proxy_nodes = [
node_id for node_id, node in nodes.items()
if node.get("kind") == "proxy" or node.get("origin") == "proxy"
]
payload = {
"languages": languages,
"summary": engine.summary(),
"preanalysis": preanalysis,
"attack_surface": engine.attack_surface()[:25],
"hotspots": engine.complexity_hotspots(10)[:25],
"proxy_nodes": proxy_nodes[:25],
"subgraphs": {
name: summarize_subgraph(name)
for name in engine.subgraph_names()
},
}
if hasattr(engine, "type_references"):
payload["type_reference_samples"] = {
node_id: engine.type_references(node_id)[:10]
for node_id in list(nodes)[:25]
}
print(json.dumps(payload, indent=2))
PY
Step 4: Verify the output.
The output should include:
languagessummarypreanalysishotspots (possibly empty)proxy_nodes (empty on v0.2.x or when there are no unresolved calls; on
0.5.0+ may include proxy.external:* entries declared in
.trailmark/links.toml)subgraphs with counts and sample IDsOn Trailmark 0.5.0+, attack_surface entries may carry an attributes
object (e.g. solidity_visibility, solidity_overridden_by). Pass it
through unchanged — downstream consumers use it to rank entrypoints.
Some subgraphs may have zero nodes for some codebases (this is normal). Return the full JSON payload regardless.
tools
Conduct comprehensive GDPR compliance assessments by evaluating data processing activities against EU Regulation 2016/679, including Article 30 records of processing, lawful basis validation, data subject rights implementation, Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) under Article 35, breach notification procedures, international transfer safeguards (SCCs, adequacy decisions), and technical/organizational measures under Article 32. Use when processing personal data of EU residents, preparing for supervisory authority audits, implementing privacy-by-design for new systems, scoping compliance gaps for M&A due diligence, assessing third-party processors, or responding to data subject access requests at scale. Incorporates 2026 guidance from ICO, EDPB, and post-Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 UK-GDPR considerations. Do not use for implementing specific Article 32 controls — use implementing-gdpr-data-protection-controls; or for DSAR automation — use implementing-gdpr-data-subject-access-request.
tools
Parse Windows forensic artifacts—$MFT/$J (MFTECmd), Prefetch (PECmd), registry hives (RECmd), shellbags, and Amcache—into normalized CSV/JSON with Eric Zimmerman's EZ Tools, then load results into Timeline Explorer for analysis. Use during DFIR/incident-response investigations, after triage collection (e.g. with KAPE), to establish program execution, file/folder access, and persistence evidence from acquired forensic images.
development
Build automated multi-turn adversarial attacks against conversational LLM targets using Microsoft PyRIT's RedTeamingOrchestrator, CrescendoOrchestrator (gradual escalation), and TreeOfAttacksWithPruningOrchestrator (adaptive branching), with scorer feedback loops and persisted conversation memory. Use when single-shot LLM scanning is insufficient and you need multi-turn, scorer-driven AI red-team campaigns against a chatbot or agent.
testing
Stand up MISP, enable and cache curated threat feeds (CIRCL, abuse.ch, Feodo Tracker), apply warninglists to suppress false positives, query indicators with PyMISP, and export attributes as auto-generated Suricata/Sigma/Wazuh detection rules. Use when maturing a MISP instance to actively drive detection, curating threat feeds with quality controls, or automating IOC-to-detection pipelines for the SIEM/IDS.