name

gatefrisk

description

Frisk your HTTP routes for UNGATED MUTATING endpoints before you ship. Triggers automatically when you are about to report a coding task done and your diff added or changed a route handler (or on /gatefrisk). An endpoint that writes, deletes, pays, trades, or triggers a job with no auth check is an open switch on the public internet — a crawler's GET can flip it. gatefrisk enumerates the changed routes, classifies each one mutating vs read-only, checks the mutating ones for a gate, and refuses to say "done" while a mutating route ships open.

gatefrisk — no ungated writes ship

Agents (and humans) add "just for now" endpoints: /run, /retry, /close, /admin/rebuild. They work in the demo, they ship, and then anything on the internet can call them — a search crawler following a GET is enough. This happened for real: an anonymous GET to an open /run route executed a trading step on three live portfolios at 7am, hours before the scheduled run. A linter can't catch this — it doesn't know which routes mutate and which auth pattern this codebase uses. The agent writing the diff knows both.

When to run

Automatically, right before you report a coding task complete, if the diff added or changed anything route-shaped: an HTTP handler, a fetch() worker export, a routes//api/ file, a webhook, an RPC method.
On demand when the user types /gatefrisk (audits the current diff, or a named file/dir).

What it looks at

Only the routes touched by the diff — new handlers and handlers whose body changed. Don't re-audit the whole app; stay scoped and fast. For each touched route, read enough of the surrounding file to see the framework's auth idiom (middleware, guard call, header check) — the check is contextual, not regex.

The process

Enumerate touched routes. From the diff, list every reachable handler: Express/Hono/Fastify (app.get/post/...), Next.js (app/api/**/route.ts, pages/api), Cloudflare Workers (fetch() + url.pathname branches), Django/Flask/FastAPI decorators, webhooks, cron-trigger HTTP mirrors.
Classify each route: MUTATING or read-only. Mutating = it writes state or causes an effect: DB insert/update/delete, order/trade/payment calls, file writes, cache purges, job/queue triggers, emails/posts, config changes, closePosition(...), env.KV.put(...). The HTTP verb is a hint, not the truth — a GET that runs a job is mutating (that's the classic hole).
Check every MUTATING route for a gate. A gate = any caller check before the effect: auth middleware on the router, a session/JWT/API-key/bearer verification, HMAC signature check (webhooks), an allow-list, mTLS. Find the codebase's existing idiom first and judge against it. "The URL is secret" and "it's just a demo/staging" are not gates.
Check the gate is real. A check that only proves the SERVER has credentials (e.g. a "creds exist" guard), a comparison against a hardcoded token in the repo, or a gate placed AFTER the effect does not count.
Downgrade honestly. Read-only routes that leak nothing sensitive are fine open — say so and move on. Idempotent-but-effectful (e.g. re-runs a sync) is still mutating.

What to do with findings

Do the safe, mechanical fix yourself: apply the codebase's existing auth idiom to the open route (same middleware, same bearer-secret pattern the neighbouring routes use), or return 405 for verbs that shouldn't exist. State the fix in the report.
Escalate when the gate is a design decision: which auth scheme a fresh codebase should adopt, whether an endpoint should exist at all, webhook signature secrets that need provisioning. Describe the risk, give 1–2 options, ask approve / fix / skip.
Never invent a finding. A read-only public endpoint is not a vulnerability. False alarms train people to ignore you.

The hard rule

Do not report the task as done while a mutating route in the diff has no gate (neither fixed nor explicitly accepted by the user). If everything is gated or read-only, say so in one line and finish.

Output format

gatefrisk — N touched route(s)
  ✗ HIGH  POST /okx/close      closes live positions, no auth → gated with Bearer CRON_SECRET (same idiom as /admin)  [fixed]
  ✗ HIGH  GET  /run            triggers a trading step, anonymous GET can fire it — needs your auth decision  [escalated]
  ✓ GET  /state, /health       read-only, fine open
1 route needs your call before this is done.

Be terse. Real signal only. The severity is HIGH whenever money, user data, or jobs can be moved by an anonymous caller; MEDIUM when authenticated-but-wrong users could (missing ownership check); LOW for hardening.

gatefrisk — no ungated writes ship

When to run

Automatically, right before you report a coding task complete, if the diff added or changed anything route-shaped: an HTTP handler, a fetch() worker export, a routes//api/ file, a webhook, an RPC method.

On demand when the user types /gatefrisk (audits the current diff, or a named file/dir).

What it looks at

The process

Enumerate touched routes. From the diff, list every reachable handler: Express/Hono/Fastify (app.get/post/...), Next.js (app/api/**/route.ts, pages/api), Cloudflare Workers (fetch() + url.pathname branches), Django/Flask/FastAPI decorators, webhooks, cron-trigger HTTP mirrors.

Classify each route: MUTATING or read-only. Mutating = it writes state or causes an effect: DB insert/update/delete, order/trade/payment calls, file writes, cache purges, job/queue triggers, emails/posts, config changes, closePosition(...), env.KV.put(...). The HTTP verb is a hint, not the truth — a GET that runs a job is mutating (that's the classic hole).

Check every MUTATING route for a gate. A gate = any caller check before the effect: auth middleware on the router, a session/JWT/API-key/bearer verification, HMAC signature check (webhooks), an allow-list, mTLS. Find the codebase's existing idiom first and judge against it. "The URL is secret" and "it's just a demo/staging" are not gates.

Check the gate is real. A check that only proves the SERVER has credentials (e.g. a "creds exist" guard), a comparison against a hardcoded token in the repo, or a gate placed AFTER the effect does not count.

Downgrade honestly. Read-only routes that leak nothing sensitive are fine open — say so and move on. Idempotent-but-effectful (e.g. re-runs a sync) is still mutating.

What to do with findings

Do the safe, mechanical fix yourself: apply the codebase's existing auth idiom to the open route (same middleware, same bearer-secret pattern the neighbouring routes use), or return 405 for verbs that shouldn't exist. State the fix in the report.

Escalate when the gate is a design decision: which auth scheme a fresh codebase should adopt, whether an endpoint should exist at all, webhook signature secrets that need provisioning. Describe the risk, give 1–2 options, ask approve / fix / skip.

Never invent a finding. A read-only public endpoint is not a vulnerability. False alarms train people to ignore you.

The hard rule

Output format

gatefrisk — N touched route(s) ✗ HIGH POST /okx/close closes live positions, no auth → gated with Bearer CRON_SECRET (same idiom as /admin) [fixed] ✗ HIGH GET /run triggers a trading step, anonymous GET can fire it — needs your auth decision [escalated] ✓ GET /state, /health read-only, fine open 1 route needs your call before this is done.