security-hub

name	security-hub
description	[WHAT] Unified security skill router — routes to the right security sub-skill based on intent [HOW] Decision tree routes to: security-review (code audit), security-best-practices (language-specific), security-threat-model (threat modeling), security-ownership-map (ownership topology) [WHEN] Use when user mentions security, audit, vulnerability, threat model, OWASP, pentest, code review security, ownership analysis [WHY] Prevents loading 4 separate security skills; routes to the right one based on context Triggers: "security", "audit", "vulnerability", "threat model", "OWASP", "pentest", "code review security", "ownership", "bus factor", "security review"
skill_type	router
category	security
subsumes	["security-review","security-best-practices","security-threat-model","security-ownership-map"]

Security Hub — Unified Security Router

Routes security requests to the appropriate specialized sub-skill. Use this router instead of loading individual security skills directly.

Decision Tree

Step 1: Identify Intent

User Intent	Sub-Skill	Load When
Code audit, checklist review, pre-deployment checks	security-review	User asks to "review security", "check for vulnerabilities", "audit this code"
Language-specific best practices (Python/JS/Go)	security-best-practices	User asks for "secure coding in [language]", "framework security", "language-specific security"
Threat modeling, trust boundaries, abuse paths	security-threat-model	User asks to "threat model", "enumerate threats", "attacker paths", "AppSec analysis"
Ownership risk, bus factor, maintainer topology	security-ownership-map	User asks for "ownership analysis", "bus factor", "who owns sensitive code", "orphaned code"

Step 2: Clarify Ambiguity

• If intent is unclear, ask: "What type of security work? (1) Code review (2) Language best practices (3) Threat model (4) Ownership analysis"
• If scope is unclear (e.g., "security audit"), default to security-review (broadest checklist)

Sub-Skill Quick Reference

security-review (Code Audit Checklist)

Pre-deployment security checklist covering: secrets management, input validation, SQL injection, auth/authz, XSS/CSRF, rate limiting, dependency security. Best for: code review, pre-deploy gates, general vulnerability scanning.

security-best-practices (Language/Framework Security)

Language and framework-specific security guidance (Python, JS/TS, Go). Loads reference docs for secure-by-default coding, passive vulnerability detection, and security report generation. Best for: new projects, framework-specific security, secure coding patterns.

security-threat-model (AppSec Threat Modeling)

Repository-grounded threat modeling: trust boundaries, assets, attacker capabilities, abuse paths, and mitigations. Produces Markdown threat model documents. Best for: architecture review, AppSec planning, risk prioritization.

security-ownership-map (Ownership Topology)

Git-based ownership analysis: compute bus factor, identify orphaned sensitive code, map maintainer topology, export graph data (CSV/JSON/GraphML). Best for: security maintainer analysis, CODEOWNERS drift, ownership risk.

Cross-Cutting Workflows

Use multiple sub-skills together for comprehensive security analysis:

1. New Project Security

   • Start: security-best-practices (secure-by-default patterns)
   • Then: security-review (pre-deploy checklist)

2. AppSec Deep Dive

   • Start: security-threat-model (enumerate threats)
   • Then: security-review (validate controls)
   • Then: security-ownership-map (identify maintainers for high-risk code)

3. Incident Response / Post-Mortem

   • Start: security-ownership-map (who owns the vulnerable code?)
   • Then: security-threat-model (how was this exploitable?)
   • Then: security-best-practices (what secure pattern prevents this?)

4. CODEOWNERS Validation

   • Start: security-ownership-map (compute actual ownership)
   • Then: security-threat-model (identify sensitive boundaries)
   • Compare: ownership map vs CODEOWNERS file

Notes

• Progressive disclosure: Load only the sub-skill you need. The router stays small; sub-skills contain the full content.
• No overlap: Each sub-skill has a distinct scope. No redundant checklists across skills.
• Composable: Chain sub-skills together for end-to-end security workflows.