Skip to main content

secure-code-review

Systematically reviews code for SQL injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control, cryptographic failures, and other common OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities, providing vulnerable code examples and ready-to-use remediation guidance. Trigger this skill when users ask for a security review, vulnerability scan, or penetration testing assistance, or mention keywords like OWASP, SQL injection, XSS, code audit, or security checklist.

معلومات المصدر

المستودع
zebbern/claude-code-guide
آخر نشاط في المصدر
٣١ مايو ٢٠٢٦ في ١٥:٤٤
لغة SKILL.md المكتشفة
الإنجليزية
النجوم
٤٬٦٦٤
التفرعات
٤٧٠

خيارات التثبيت

يُحدَّد Prompt الذي يراجع المصدر أولًا بشكل افتراضي. يمكنك التبديل إلى أمر مباشر أو تنزيل نسخة محلية.

مراجعة ملفات المصدر

اقرأ SKILL.md وأي ملفات مرافقة يعرضها SkillsMP قبل أن تقرر التثبيت.

مستكشف الملفات
2 ملفات

عرض SKILL.md

SKILL.md
تعليمات المصدر · معاينة للقراءة فقط
name
secure-code-review
description
Systematically reviews code for SQL injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control, cryptographic failures, and other common OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities, providing vulnerable code examples and ready-to-use remediation guidance. Trigger this skill when users ask for a security review, vulnerability scan, or penetration testing assistance, or mention keywords like OWASP, SQL injection, XSS, code audit, or security checklist.
license
MIT
# OWASP Top 10 Code Security Review Checklist A systematic security review based on the OWASP Top 10 (2021) standard. Each item includes: vulnerability description, typical vulnerable code, inspection checkpoints, and remediation examples. Designed for security-focused code review of web applications. ## Usage Provide the code files or code snippets to review, and specify which OWASP categories to check (or request a full review) to receive an item-by-item audit report. **Example prompts:** - "Check this code for SQL injection risks" - "Run a full OWASP Top 10 security review on this project" - "Does this API endpoint have any SSRF vulnerabilities?" --- ## Quick Reference | ID | Category | Key Check | |----|----------|-----------| | A01 | Broken Access Control | Does every endpoint verify the current user's identity? Can users access others' data by changing IDs? | | A02 | Cryptographic Failures | Are passwords hashed with bcrypt/argon2? Are secrets hardcoded? | | A03 | Injection | String-concatenated SQL? `shell=True`? Unescaped template output? | | A04 | Insecure Design | Is rate limiting in place? Can critical workflows be bypassed? | | A05 | Security Misconfiguration | DEBUG enabled? Stack traces in error pages? Default credentials? | | A06 | Vulnerable Components | Any CVEs from `pip audit` / `npm audit`? | | A07 | Authentication Failures | Is JWT signature verified? Can tokens be revoked? Is MFA available? | | A08 | Integrity Failures | Any `pickle.loads` deserializing untrusted data? | | A09 | Logging & Monitoring Failures | Are plaintext passwords in logs? Are failed logins recorded? | | A10 | SSRF | Are user-supplied URLs filtered against internal IPs? | --- ## Review Process SOP **Core principle: prefer false positives over missed true positives.** 1. **Define scope** — Identify the files, modules, or code snippets to review 2. **Full coverage check** — Scan through A01-A10 sequentially. **Every item must appear in the report** (mark items with no findings as pass). The default behavior is to only report issues found — this process requires full coverage to ensure nothing is missed 3. **Risk classification** — Label each finding: - RED High: Directly exploitable (RCE, SQL injection, SSRF reaching internal networks, plaintext password storage) - YELLOW Medium: Exploitable under specific conditions (missing rate limiting, weak password policy, static tokens) - GREEN Low: Defense-in-depth gap with no direct exploitation path (missing security headers, insufficient logging) 4. **Every finding must include ready-to-use fix code** (actual code, not just a description). Reference specific `file:line_number` 5. **Output the review report** — Use the template below, findings sorted by severity descending, with a prioritized remediation list at the end --- ## A01:2021 — Broken Access Control **Risk:** Users can access other users' data or perform unauthorized operations. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Does every API endpoint enforce authorization? - [ ] Are there IDOR vulnerabilities (Insecure Direct Object References) — can users access others' data by modifying ID parameters? - [ ] Do admin interfaces verify roles? - [ ] Is access control enforced server-side (not just by hiding UI elements)? - [ ] Is the CORS policy overly permissive? ### Vulnerable Code Example ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: No authorization check — any user can view others' orders by changing user_id @app.route("/api/orders/<user_id>") def get_orders(user_id): orders = db.query(f"SELECT * FROM orders WHERE user_id = {user_id}") return jsonify(orders) ``` ### Remediation Example ```python # ✅ Fixed: Verify the authenticated user can only access their own data @app.route("/api/orders") @login_required def get_orders(): current_user_id = get_current_user().id orders = db.query("SELECT * FROM orders WHERE user_id = %s", (current_user_id,)) return jsonify(orders) ``` --- ## A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures **Risk:** Sensitive data (passwords, credit card numbers, personal information) is unencrypted or uses weak cryptographic algorithms. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Are passwords stored using secure hashing (bcrypt/scrypt/argon2) rather than MD5/SHA1? - [ ] Is HTTPS enforced for sensitive data in transit? - [ ] Are encryption keys hardcoded in the source code? - [ ] Are deprecated cryptographic algorithms in use (DES, RC4, MD5)? - [ ] Are sensitive database fields encrypted at rest? ### Vulnerable Code Example ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: MD5 for password storage, hardcoded secret key import hashlib SECRET_KEY = "my-secret-key-123" def save_password(password): hashed = hashlib.md5(password.encode()).hexdigest() db.save(hashed) ``` ### Remediation Example ```python # ✅ Fixed: bcrypt for password hashing, secret key from environment variable import bcrypt import os SECRET_KEY = os.environ["SECRET_KEY"] def save_password(password): salt = bcrypt.gensalt() hashed = bcrypt.hashpw(password.encode(), salt) db.save(hashed) ``` --- ## A03:2021 — Injection **Risk:** User input is concatenated directly into SQL, OS commands, LDAP queries, etc., allowing attackers to execute arbitrary queries or commands. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Do SQL queries use parameterized queries / ORM (not string concatenation)? - [ ] Are there `os.system()` or `subprocess.call(shell=True)` calls that concatenate user input? - [ ] Does template rendering properly escape user input (preventing XSS)? - [ ] Are special characters filtered in LDAP / XPath / NoSQL queries? - [ ] Are unfiltered user inputs logged directly (log injection)? ### SQL Injection — Vulnerable Code ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: String-concatenated SQL — attacker can input ' OR 1=1 -- @app.route("/api/user") def get_user(): username = request.args.get("username") query = f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE username = '{username}'" result = db.execute(query) return jsonify(result) ``` ### SQL Injection — Remediation ```python # ✅ Fixed: Parameterized query @app.route("/api/user") def get_user(): username = request.args.get("username") result = db.execute( "SELECT * FROM users WHERE username = %s", (username,) ) return jsonify(result) ``` ### Command Injection — Vulnerable Code ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: User input concatenated directly into shell command import os def ping_host(host): os.system(f"ping -c 4 {host}") ``` ### Command Injection — Remediation ```python # ✅ Fixed: Use subprocess with list arguments, shell disabled import subprocess import re def ping_host(host): if not re.match(r'^[a-zA-Z0-9.\-]+$', host): raise ValueError("Invalid hostname") subprocess.run(["ping", "-c", "4", host], check=True) ``` --- ## A04:2021 — Insecure Design **Risk:** Business logic design flaws that cannot be fixed by a perfect implementation. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Do critical operations have rate limiting? - [ ] Can the password reset flow be abused (username enumeration, verification code brute-force)? - [ ] Do sensitive operations (payments, transfers) require secondary confirmation? - [ ] Are there batch operation endpoints with no upper limit? - [ ] Can business workflows be executed out of order (e.g., skipping payment to complete an order)? ### Vulnerable Code Example ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: No attempt limit on verification code — can be brute-forced @app.route("/api/verify-code", methods=["POST"]) def verify_code(): code = request.json["code"] stored_code = session.get("verification_code") if code == stored_code: return jsonify({"status": "verified"}) return jsonify({"status": "invalid"}), 400 ``` ### Remediation Example ```python # ✅ Fixed: Added attempt limit and expiration @app.route("/api/verify-code", methods=["POST"]) def verify_code(): attempts = session.get("verify_attempts", 0) if attempts >= 5: return jsonify({"error": "Too many attempts, please request a new code"}), 429 code = request.json["code"] stored = session.get("verification_code") expire_at = session.get("code_expire_at", 0) if time.time() > expire_at: return jsonify({"error": "Verification code has expired"}), 400 session["verify_attempts"] = attempts + 1 if code == stored: session.pop("verify_attempts", None) return jsonify({"status": "verified"}) return jsonify({"status": "invalid"}), 400 ``` --- ## A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration **Risk:** Applications or servers use default configurations, enable unnecessary features, or expose sensitive information in error messages. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Is DEBUG mode disabled in production? - [ ] Do error pages leak stack traces, database versions, etc.? - [ ] Are default credentials still in use? - [ ] Do HTTP responses include security headers (X-Frame-Options, Content-Security-Policy, etc.)? - [ ] Are unnecessary HTTP methods (PUT, DELETE, TRACE) disabled? - [ ] Is directory listing disabled? ### Vulnerable Code Example ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: DEBUG enabled in production, leaking sensitive information app = Flask(__name__) app.config["DEBUG"] = True app.config["SECRET_KEY"] = "default-secret" @app.errorhandler(500) def error_handler(e): return jsonify({"error": str(e), "traceback": traceback.format_exc()}), 500 ``` ### Remediation Example ```python # ✅ Fixed: Configuration from environment variables, DEBUG off in production import os app = Flask(__name__) app.config["DEBUG"] = os.environ.get("FLASK_DEBUG", "false").lower() == "true" app.config["SECRET_KEY"] = os.environ["FLASK_SECRET_KEY"] @app.errorhandler(500) def error_handler(e): app.logger.error(f"Internal error: {e}") return jsonify({"error": "Internal server error, please try again later"}), 500 ``` --- ## A06:2021 — Vulnerable and Outdated Components **Risk:** Using third-party libraries or framework versions with known vulnerabilities. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Do dependencies have known CVEs (scan with `pip audit`, `npm audit`, `snyk`, etc.)? - [ ] Are there dependencies that haven't been updated in a long time? - [ ] Are any unmaintained libraries in use? - [ ] Are lock files (package-lock.json / requirements.txt) under version control? - [ ] Is there an automated dependency update mechanism (Dependabot, etc.)? ### Scan Commands ```bash # Python projects pip audit # Node.js projects npm audit # General scanning # Use open-source tools like trivy or grype to scan container/project dependencies ``` ### Remediation Guidance ```bash # Update vulnerable packages pip install --upgrade package_name # Auto-fix npm vulnerabilities npm audit fix # Pin dependency versions to prevent implicit upgrades pip freeze > requirements.txt ``` --- ## A07:2021 — Identification and Authentication Failures **Risk:** Authentication mechanisms have flaws that allow brute-force attacks, credential stuffing, or session hijacking. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Is there a login failure rate limit (account lockout / delay)? - [ ] Is the password policy reasonable (minimum length, complexity requirements)? - [ ] Are session tokens invalidated on logout? - [ ] Are session IDs sufficiently random and unpredictable? - [ ] Is MFA supported for sensitive operations? - [ ] Are JWT tokens validated for signature and expiration? ### Vulnerable Code Example ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: JWT signature not verified, accepts alg=none import jwt def verify_token(token): payload = jwt.decode(token, options={"verify_signature": False}) return payload ``` ### Remediation Example ```python # ✅ Fixed: Enforce signature and expiration verification, specify algorithm import jwt import os JWT_SECRET = os.environ["JWT_SECRET"] def verify_token(token): try: payload = jwt.decode( token, JWT_SECRET, algorithms=["HS256"], options={"require": ["exp", "iat", "sub"]} ) return payload except jwt.ExpiredSignatureError: raise AuthError("Token has expired") except jwt.InvalidTokenError: raise AuthError("Invalid token") ``` --- ## A08:2021 — Software and Data Integrity Failures **Risk:** Failure to verify the integrity of software updates, critical data, or CI/CD pipelines, enabling supply chain attacks or data tampering. **Checkpoints:** - [ ] Does deserialization use unsafe methods (e.g., Python's `pickle.loads` on untrusted data)? - [ ] Does the CI/CD pipeline have integrity verification? - [ ] Do third-party CDN resources use SRI (Subresource Integrity)? - [ ] Are modifications to critical configuration files audit-logged? - [ ] Does the auto-update mechanism verify signatures? ### Vulnerable Code Example ```python # ❌ Vulnerable: Deserializing untrusted data — can lead to remote code execution import pickle @app.route("/api/import", methods=["POST"]) def import_data(): data = pickle.loads(request.data) process(data) return "OK" ``` ### Remediation Example ```python # ✅ Fixed: Use a safe data format (JSON), refuse to deserialize arbitrary objects import json @app.route("/api/import", methods=["POST"]) def import_data(): try: data = json.loads(request.data) except json.JSONDecodeError: return jsonify({"error": "Invalid JSON format"}), 400 process(data) return "OK" ``` --- ## A09:2021 — Security Logging and Monitoring Failures **Risk:** Lack of security event logging and monitoring, preventing timely detection and response to attacks. **Checkpoints:**
عرض على GitHub
ملف SKILL.md هذا كبير جدا، لذلك يعرض SkillsMP القسم الاول فقط هنا. عرض على GitHub