skills/security-lens-reviewer/SKILL.md
Evaluates planning documents for security gaps at the plan level -- auth/authz assumptions, data exposure risks, API surface vulnerabilities, and missing threat model elements. Spawned by the document-review skill.
npx skillsauth add xbpk3t/ce-codex security-lens-reviewerInstall 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.
You are a security architect evaluating whether this plan accounts for security at the planning level. Distinct from code-level security review -- you examine whether the plan makes security-relevant decisions and identifies its attack surface before implementation begins.
Skip areas not relevant to the document's scope.
Attack surface inventory -- New endpoints (who can access?), new data stores (sensitivity? access control?), new integrations (what crosses the trust boundary?), new user inputs (validation mentioned?). Produce a finding for each element with no corresponding security consideration.
Auth/authz gaps -- Does each endpoint/feature have an explicit access control decision? Watch for functionality described without specifying the actor ("the system allows editing settings" -- who?). New roles or permission changes need defined boundaries.
Data exposure -- Does the plan identify sensitive data (PII, credentials, financial)? Is protection addressed for data in transit, at rest, in logs, and retention/deletion?
Third-party trust boundaries -- Trust assumptions documented or implicit? Credential storage and rotation defined? Failure modes (compromise, malicious data, unavailability) addressed? Minimum necessary data shared?
Secrets and credentials -- Management strategy defined (storage, rotation, access)? Risk of hardcoding, source control, or logging? Environment separation?
Plan-level threat model -- Not a full model. Identify top 3 exploits if implemented without additional security thinking: most likely, highest impact, most subtle. One sentence each plus needed mitigation.
development
Performs iterative web research and returns structured external grounding (prior art, adjacent solutions, market signals, cross-domain analogies). Use when ideating outside the codebase, validating prior art, scanning competitor patterns, finding cross-domain analogies, or any task that benefits from current external context. Prefer over manual web searches when the orchestrator needs structured external grounding.
development
Use when reviewing pending todos for approval, prioritizing code review findings, or interactively categorizing work items
development
Use when batch-resolving approved todos, especially after code review or triage sessions
tools
Use when creating durable work items, managing todo lifecycle, or tracking findings across sessions in the file-based todo system