threat-model

Security threat modeling, attack surface mapping, and trust boundary analysis on a codebase. Triggers on 'threat model', 'security review', 'attack surface', 'trust boundaries', or when assessing a project's security posture. Also trigger when the user is about to build security-sensitive features (auth, crypto, file I/O, network services, native bridges) and needs to understand the threat landscape first — even if they don't explicitly say "threat model." Also triggers on 'what changed' or 'diff analysis' for incremental security review of recent commits.

インストールへ移動

リポジトリ: pproenca/dot-skills
ソースの最終更新活動: 2026年7月5日 07:23
検出された SKILL.md の言語: 英語
スター: 194
フォーク: 17

インストール方法

デフォルトでは、最初にソースを確認する Prompt が選択されています。直接コマンドに切り替えるか、ローカルコピーをダウンロードすることもできます。

Codex または Claude でインストールこの Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。

直接コマンドでは確認用 Prompt が省略されます。実行前にソースを確認してください。

npx skills add https://github.com/pproenca/dot-skills --skill threat-model

コマンドは1行のまま表示されます。コピー前に横へスクロールして全体を確認してください。

ローカルで確認しますか？SkillsMP が現在取得できるファイルをダウンロードできます。

ソースファイルを確認

インストールを決める前に、SKILL.md と SkillsMP に表示されている付属ファイルをお読みください。

ファイルエクスプローラー

15 ファイル

SKILL.md

ソースの指示 · 読み取り専用プレビュー

検索に戻るインストールに戻る

drizzle-nextjs-postgres

Drizzle ORM against PostgreSQL inside a Next.js App Router app. Covers client construction (globalThis singleton across HMR, serverless pool sizing, `prepare:false` behind PgBouncer/Supavisor, driver choice when you need interactive transactions, `server-only`), reads in Server Components under Next.js 16 Cache Components (`use cache` superseding `unstable_cache` and the `revalidate`/`dynamic` segment configs, Suspense boundaries, React `cache()` dedupe), Server Actions (authorization inside the action, `updateTag` vs `revalidateTag`, `after()`), Postgres schema types (timestamptz, identity vs serial, jsonb, numeric-as-string, bigint modes), drizzle-kit migrations (generate vs push, CONCURRENTLY outside the migrator, NOT VALID constraints, rename prompts), transactions and pooled connections, and Postgres query traps (keyset pagination, count cost, driver-dependent `db.execute()` shape, NOT IN nulls, prepared statements). Use when writing or reviewing Drizzle + Postgres code in Next.js.

2026-07-24

relational-data-modeling

Corrects the wrong defaults a model has when designing a relational schema — the DDL decisions an experienced engineer makes differently. Use when creating or reviewing tables, migrations, ER models, or ORM schema definitions. Covers identity and keys (surrogate vs natural, identity vs serial, uuidv7, composite keys that make cross-tenant references impossible), relationships (polymorphic foreign keys the database cannot enforce, referential actions, unindexed FK columns, disjoint subtypes), invariants the engine can prove instead of application code (EXCLUDE, partial unique indexes, CHECK limits, deferrable cycles, NOT VALID), types (timestamptz, exact money, range types, enum vs lookup table), derived and encoded data (generated columns, JSONB as an escape hatch), and time (events vs in-place updates, soft-delete flags that silently disable constraints, temporal keys). NOT for query tuning, index selection for read paths, or connection pooling.

2026-07-23

relational-database-design

Distills a logical relational-database design methodology into rules an agent applies while designing or reviewing a schema. Covers the design sequence (mission → tables → fields → keys → relationships → business rules → views → integrity review), one-subject-per-table decomposition, atomic single-valued fields, candidate/primary/foreign keys, relationship types with deletion rules and participation, the four levels of data integrity, database-vs-application business rules, validation tables, views for derived data, and the flat-file / spreadsheet / RDBMS-driven antipatterns to avoid. The structure is logical and RDBMS-agnostic, and normalized by construction. Use when designing a new relational schema, reviewing or refactoring an existing one, resolving redundant or repeating data, choosing keys, modeling relationships, or deciding where a constraint belongs.

2026-07-23

このリポジトリのすべてを見る

Threat Model

Produces structured, evidence-backed security threat models for any codebase. Goes beyond surface enumeration by tracing untrusted data through actual code paths, clustering findings by root cause, and constructing exploit chains that combine individual findings into higher-severity attack paths.

When to Apply

User asks to threat model, security review, or map attack surfaces for a codebase

Starting work on security-sensitive features (auth, crypto, file I/O, networking, native bridges)

Evaluating a new codebase or major architectural change for security implications

Reviewing a PR or recent commits for security regressions (incremental/diff mode)

After a security incident to reassess the threat landscape

Workflow Overview

Phase 0 (conditional): Diff Analysis — if git range provided, scope to changed code Phase 1: Codebase Survey → Understand what the project is and does Phase 2: Component Mapping → Identify components, data flows, and language bridges Phase 3: Asset Identification → Determine what needs protecting Phase 4: Trust Boundaries → Classify inputs by trust level, inventory entry points Phase 5: Data Flow Tracing → Follow untrusted values from entry to sink ← key technique Phase 6: Attack Surface Enum → Document surfaces with traced evidence Phase 7: Pattern Clustering → Group 3+ similar findings by root cause Phase 8: Exploit Chains → Combine findings into multi-step attack paths Phase 9: Calibration → Rate with chain-adjusted and systemic severity Phase 10: Output → Write structured THREAT-MODEL.md

Threat Model

When to Apply

User asks to threat model, security review, or map attack surfaces for a codebase

Starting work on security-sensitive features (auth, crypto, file I/O, networking, native bridges)

Evaluating a new codebase or major architectural change for security implications

Reviewing a PR or recent commits for security regressions (incremental/diff mode)

After a security incident to reassess the threat landscape

Workflow Overview

Technique	When to Read	What It Adds
Data Flow Tracing	Phase 5 — always	Traces untrusted input from entry to sink through actual code. Produces evidence-backed findings instead of theoretical risks
Pattern Clustering	Phase 7 — after enumeration	Groups related findings by root cause. Recommends systemic fixes instead of individual patches
Exploit Chains	Phase 8 — after clustering	Combines findings into multi-step attack paths rated by terminal impact
Bridge Analysis	Phase 6 — when FFI/bridges found	Systematic checklist for cross-language boundaries (Swift↔C, Rust↔C, Rails↔NGINX)
Diff Analysis	Phase 0 — for incremental review	Scopes analysis to changed code, identifies regressions

Mode	Trigger	What It Does
Full analysis	"threat model this codebase"	Analyzes entire codebase, produces fresh findings.json + THREAT-MODEL.md
Diff analysis	"what changed since last review" / git range provided	Scopes to changed code, updates existing findings.json with new/resolved/regressed findings

File	When to Read
references/methodology.md	Before starting — the 10-phase workflow
references/output-format.md	When writing output — 6-section template
references/findings-schema.md	When writing findings.json — structured schema
references/attack-patterns.md	When enumerating surfaces — technology patterns
references/techniques/	During specific phases — analytical techniques

threat-model

インストール方法

ソースファイルを確認

Threat Model

When to Apply

Workflow Overview

Threat Model

When to Apply

Workflow Overview

How to Use

Analytical Techniques

Key Principles

Output

Pipeline Integration

Two Modes

References

threat-model

ソース情報

インストール方法

ソースファイルを確認

このリポジトリの他の Skills

Threat Model

When to Apply

Workflow Overview

Threat Model

When to Apply

Workflow Overview

How to Use

Analytical Techniques

Key Principles

Output

Pipeline Integration

Two Modes

References

このリポジトリの他の Skills