git clone https://github.com/duc01226/EasyPlatform
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/duc01226/EasyPlatform "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/.claude/skills/security" ~/.claude/skills/duc01226-easyplatform-security && rm -rf "$T"
.claude/skills/security/SKILL.md<!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->[IMPORTANT] Use
to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.TaskCreate
<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.
<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention --> <!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning -->AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:
- Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal.
- Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing.
- Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain.
- Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path.
- When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site.
- Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code.
- Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks.
- Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis.
- Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly.
- Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.
<!-- /SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning -->Evidence-Based Reasoning — Speculation is FORBIDDEN. Every claim needs proof.
- Cite
, grep results, or framework docs for EVERY claimfile:line- Declare confidence: >80% act freely, 60-80% verify first, <60% DO NOT recommend
- Cross-service validation required for architectural changes
- "I don't have enough evidence" is valid and expected output
BLOCKED until:
Evidence file path (- [ ])file:lineGrep search performed- [ ]3+ similar patterns found- [ ]Confidence level stated- [ ]Forbidden without proof: "obviously", "I think", "should be", "probably", "this is because" If incomplete → output:
"Insufficient evidence. Verified: [...]. Not verified: [...]."
— Domain entity catalog, relationships, cross-service sync (read when task involves business entities/models) (content auto-injected by hook — check for [Injected: ...] header before reading)docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md
External Memory: For complex or lengthy work (research, analysis, scan, review), write intermediate findings and final results to a report file in
— prevents context loss and serves as deliverable.plans/reports/
Evidence Gate: MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — every claim, finding, and recommendation requires
proof or traced evidence with confidence percentage (>80% to act, <80% must verify first).file:line
Quick Summary
Goal: Perform security review against OWASP Top 10 and project authorization patterns.
Workflow:
- Scope — Identify security-sensitive code areas
- Audit — Review against OWASP categories and platform security patterns
- Report — Document findings with severity and remediation
Key Rules:
- Analysis Mindset: systematic review, not guesswork
- Check both backend and frontend attack surfaces
- Use project authorization attributes and entity-level access expressions (see docs/project-reference/backend-patterns-reference.md)
<scope>$ARGUMENTS</scope>
Analysis Mindset (NON-NEGOTIABLE)
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).
- Do NOT assume code is secure at face value — verify by reading actual implementations
- Every vulnerability finding must include
evidencefile:line - If you cannot prove a vulnerability with a code trace, state "potential risk, not confirmed"
- Question assumptions: "Is this actually exploitable?" → trace the input path to confirm
- Challenge completeness: "Are there other attack vectors?" → check all input boundaries
- No "looks secure" without proof — state what you verified and how
Activate
arch-security-review skill and follow its workflow.
CRITICAL: Present your security findings. Wait for explicit user approval before implementing fixes.
<!-- SYNC:graph-assisted-investigation --><!-- /SYNC:graph-assisted-investigation --> <!-- SYNC:incremental-persistence -->Graph-Assisted Investigation — MANDATORY when
exists..code-graph/graph.dbHARD-GATE: MUST ATTENTION run at least ONE graph command on key files before concluding any investigation.
Pattern: Grep finds files →
reveals full system flow → Grep verifies detailstrace --direction both
Task Minimum Graph Action Investigation/Scout on 2-3 entry filestrace --direction bothFix/Debug on buggy function +callers_oftests_forFeature/Enhancement on files to be modifiedconnectionsCode Review on changed functionstests_forBlast Radius trace --direction downstreamCLI:
. Usepython .claude/scripts/code_graph {command} --jsonfirst (10-30x less noise), then--node-mode filefor detail.--node-mode function
<!-- /SYNC:incremental-persistence --> <!-- SYNC:subagent-return-contract -->Incremental Result Persistence — MANDATORY for all sub-agents or heavy inline steps processing >3 files.
- Before starting: Create report file
plans/reports/{skill}-{date}-{slug}.md- After each file/section reviewed: Append findings to report immediately — never hold in memory
- Return to main agent: Summary only (per SYNC:subagent-return-contract) with
pathFull report:- Main agent: Reads report file only when resolving specific blockers
Why: Context cutoff mid-execution loses ALL in-memory findings. Each disk write survives compaction. Partial results are better than no results.
Report naming:
plans/reports/{skill-name}-{YYMMDD}-{HHmm}-{slug}.md
<!-- /SYNC:subagent-return-contract -->Sub-Agent Return Contract — When this skill spawns a sub-agent, the sub-agent MUST return ONLY this structure. Main agent reads only this summary — NEVER requests full sub-agent output inline.
## Sub-Agent Result: [skill-name] Status: ✅ PASS | ⚠️ PARTIAL | ❌ FAIL Confidence: [0-100]% ### Findings (Critical/High only — max 10 bullets) - [severity] [file:line] [finding] ### Actions Taken - [file changed] [what changed] ### Blockers (if any) - [blocker description] Full report: plans/reports/[skill-name]-[date]-[slug].mdMain agent reads
file ONLY when: (a) resolving a specific blocker, or (b) building a fix plan. Sub-agent writes full report incrementally (per SYNC:incremental-persistence) — not held in memory.Full report
Run
to trace all entry points into sensitive functions.python .claude/scripts/code_graph query callers_of <function> --json
Graph Intelligence (RECOMMENDED if graph.db exists)
If
.code-graph/graph.db exists, enhance analysis with structural queries:
- Trace data flow to sensitive functions:
python .claude/scripts/code_graph query callers_of <function> --json - What does this function call?
python .claude/scripts/code_graph query callees_of <function> --json - Batch analysis:
python .claude/scripts/code_graph batch-query file1 file2 --json
See
block above for graph query patterns.<!-- SYNC:graph-assisted-investigation -->
Graph-Trace for Data Flow Analysis
When graph DB is available, use
trace to analyze data flow paths for security review:
— trace data flow from input to all consumers (find where untrusted data travels)python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <entry-point> --direction downstream --json
— find all entry points that reach sensitive codepython .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <sensitive-file> --direction upstream --json- Trace reveals cross-service MESSAGE_BUS flows where data crosses trust boundaries
Workflow Recommendation
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS: If you are NOT already in a workflow, you MUST ATTENTION use
to ask the user. Do NOT judge task complexity or decide this is "simple enough to skip" — the user decides whether to use a workflow, not you:AskUserQuestion
- Activate
workflow (Recommended) — security → sre-review → testquality-audit- Execute
directly — run this skill standalone/security
Next Steps
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS after completing this skill, you MUST ATTENTION use
AskUserQuestion to present these options. Do NOT skip because the task seems "simple" or "obvious" — the user decides:
- "/sre-review (Recommended)" — Production readiness review
- "/performance" — Analyze performance next
- "Skip, continue manually" — user decides
Closing Reminders
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using
TaskCreate BEFORE starting.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate decisions with user via AskUserQuestion — never auto-decide.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:
<!-- SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning:reminder -->
- IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite
evidence for every claim. Confidence >80% to act, <60% = do NOT recommend. <!-- /SYNC:evidence-based-reasoning:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:graph-assisted-investigation:reminder -->file:line - IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION run at least ONE graph command on key files when graph.db exists. Pattern: grep → trace → verify. <!-- /SYNC:graph-assisted-investigation:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->
- MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact. <!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->
- MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction. <!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->