Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索执行命令github未标认证来源可访问clear审计异常

penetration-tester渗透测试仪

Agent Skill

用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证。它适合让 Agent 编写单元测试、端到端测试、测试计划或根据失败日志定位问题。使用时需要确认项目测试框架、运行命令和夹具数据,避免为了通过测试而改坏真实逻辑;涉及浏览器或外部服务时,应区分本地模拟、测试环境和生产环境。

总安装

4,293

周安装

172

GitHub Stars

76

下载量

1,390
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

3

许可证

MIT

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:penetration-tester(渗透测试仪)
来源仓库:https://github.com/404kidwiz/claude-supercode-skills
仓库路径:skills/penetration-tester
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/404kidwiz/claude-supercode-skills --skill penetration-tester
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/404kidwiz/claude-supercode-skills --skill penetration-tester

简介

penetration-tester 用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证。

  • 它适合让 Agent 编写单元测试、端到端测试、测试计划或根据失败日志定位问题。
  • 使用时需要确认项目测试框架、运行命令和夹具数据,避免为了通过测试而改坏真实逻辑;涉及浏览器或外部服务时,应区分本地模拟、测试环境和生产环境。
  • 安装命令为 npx skills add https://github.com/404kidwiz/claude-supercode-skills --skill penetration-tester。
  • 当前分类为研究检索,适用于 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。

SKILL.md

Penetration Tester

Purpose

Provides ethical hacking and offensive security expertise specializing in vulnerability assessment and penetration testing across web applications, networks, and cloud infrastructure. Identifies and exploits security vulnerabilities before malicious actors can leverage them.

When to Use

  • Assessing the security posture of a web application, API, or network
  • Conducting a "Black Box", "Gray Box", or "White Box" penetration test
  • Validating findings from automated scanners (False Positive analysis)
  • Exploiting specific vulnerabilities (SQLi, XSS, SSRF, RCE) to prove impact
  • Performing reconnaissance and OSINT on a target
  • Auditing GraphQL or REST APIs for IDORs and logic flaws


2. Decision Framework

Testing Methodology Selection

What is the target?
│
├─ **Web Application**
│  ├─ API intensive? → **API Test** (Postman/Burp, focus on IDOR/Auth)
│  ├─ Legacy/Monolith? → **OWASP Top 10** (SQLi, XSS, Deserialization)
│  └─ Modern/SPA? → **Client-side attacks** (DOM XSS, CSTI, JWT)
│
├─ **Cloud Infrastructure**
│  ├─ AWS/Azure/GCP? → **Cloud Pentest** (Pacu, ScoutSuite, IAM privesc)
│  └─ Kubernetes? → **Container Breakout** (Capabilities, Role bindings)
│
└─ **Network / Internal**
   ├─ Active Directory? → **AD Assessment** (BloodHound, Kerberoasting)
   └─ External Perimeter? → **Recon + Service Exploitation** (Nmap, Metasploit)

Tool Selection Matrix

PhaseCategoryTool Recommendation
ReconSubdomain EnumAmass, Subfinder
ReconContent Discoveryffuf, dirsearch
ScanningVulnerabilityNuclei, Nessus, Burp Suite Pro
ExploitationWebBurp Suite, SQLMap
ExploitationNetworkMetasploit, NetExec
Post-ExploitationWindows/ADMimikatz, BloodHound, Impacket

Severity Scoring (CVSS 3.1)

SeverityScoreCriteriaExample
Critical9.0 - 10.0RCE, Auth Bypass, SQLi (Data dump)Remote Code Execution
High7.0 - 8.9Stored XSS, IDOR (Sensitive), SSRFAdmin Account Takeover
Medium4.0 - 6.9Reflected XSS, CSRF, Info DisclosureStack Trace leakage
Low0.1 - 3.9Cookie flags, Banner grabbingMissing HttpOnly flag

Red Flags → Escalate to legal-advisor:

  • Scope creep (Touching systems not in the contract)
  • Testing production during peak hours (DoS risk)
  • Accessing PII/PHI without authorization (Proof of Concept only)
  • Testing third-party SaaS providers without permission


3. Core Workflows

Workflow 1: Web Application Assessment (OWASP)

Goal: Identify critical vulnerabilities in a web app.

Steps:

  1. Reconnaissance # Subdomain discovery subfinder -d target.com -o subdomains.txt # Live host verification httpx -l subdomains.txt -o live_hosts.txt
  2. Mapping & Discovery

- Spider the application (Burp Suite). - Identify all entry points (Inputs, URL parameters, Headers). - Fuzzing: ffuf -u https://target.com/FUZZ -w wordlist.txt -mc 200,403

  1. Vulnerability Hunting

- SQL Injection: Test ' OR 1=1-- on login forms and IDs. - XSS: Test <script>alert(1)</script> in comments/search. - IDOR: Change user_id=100 to user_id=101.

  1. Exploitation (PoC)

- Confirm vulnerability. - Document the request/response. - Estimate impact (Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability).



Workflow 3: Cloud Security Assessment (AWS)

Goal: Identify misconfigurations leading to privilege escalation.

Steps:

  1. Enumeration

- Obtain credentials (leaked or provided). - Run ScoutSuite: scout aws

  1. S3 Bucket Analysis

- Check for public buckets. - Check for writable buckets (Authenticated Users).

  1. IAM Privilege Escalation

- Analyze permissions. Look for iam:PassRole, ec2:CreateInstanceProfile. - Exploit: Create EC2 instance with Admin role, SSH in, steal metadata credentials.



5. Anti-Patterns & Gotchas

❌ Anti-Pattern 1: "Scanning is Pentesting"

What it looks like:

  • Running Nessus/Acunetix, exporting the PDF, and calling it a penetration test.

Why it fails:

  • Scanners miss business logic flaws (IDORs, Logic bypasses).
  • Scanners report false positives.
  • Clients pay for human expertise, not tool output.

Correct approach:

  • Use scanners for coverage (low hanging fruit).
  • Use manual testing for depth (critical flaws).

❌ Anti-Pattern 2: Destructive Testing in Production

What it looks like:

  • Running sqlmap --os-shell on a production database.
  • Running a high-thread dirbuster scan on a fragile server.

Why it fails:

  • Data corruption.
  • Denial of Service (DoS) for real users.
  • Legal liability.

Correct approach:

  • Read-only payloads where possible (e.g., SLEEP(5) instead of DROP TABLE).
  • Rate limit scanning tools.
  • Test in Staging whenever possible.

❌ Anti-Pattern 3: Ignoring Scope

What it looks like:

  • Testing admin.target.com when only www.target.com is in scope.
  • Phishing employees when social engineering was excluded.

Why it fails:

  • Breach of contract.
  • Potential criminal charges (CFAA).

Correct approach:

  • Always verify the Rules of Engagement (RoE).
  • If you find something interesting out of scope, ask for permission first.


Examples

Example 1: Web Application Security Assessment

Scenario: Conduct comprehensive OWASP Top 10 assessment for a financial services web application.

Testing Approach:

  1. Reconnaissance: Subdomain enumeration, technology stack identification
  2. Mapping: Full application spidering, endpoint discovery
  3. Vulnerability Scanning: Automated scanning with manual verification
  4. Exploitation: Proof-of-concept development for critical findings

Key Findings:

VulnerabilityCVSSImpactRemediation
SQL Injection (Auth Bypass)9.8Full database accessParameterized queries
Stored XSS (Admin Panel)8.1Session hijackingInput sanitization
IDOR (Account Takeover)7.5Unauthorized accessAuthorization checks
Missing CSP Headers5.3XSS vulnerabilityImplement CSP

Remediation Validation:

  • Retested all findings after patch deployment
  • Verified no regression in functionality
  • Confirmed zero false positives in final report

Example 2: Cloud Infrastructure Assessment (AWS)

Scenario: Identify security misconfigurations in AWS production environment.

Assessment Approach:

  1. Enumeration: IAM policies, S3 bucket permissions, EC2 security groups
  2. Misconfiguration Analysis: ScoutSuite automated scanning
  3. Privilege Escalation: Tested for permission chaining attacks
  4. Exploitation: Validated critical findings with PoC

Critical Findings:

  • 3 S3 buckets with public read access
  • IAM user with excessive permissions (iam:PassRole → ec2:RunInstances)
  • Security groups allowing unrestricted SSH (0.0.0.0/0)
  • Unencrypted EBS volumes containing sensitive data

Business Impact:

  • Potential data breach exposure: 50,000+ customer records
  • Unauthorized compute resource creation risk
  • Compliance violations (PCI-DSS, SOC 2)

Remediation:

  • Implemented SCPs to restrict public bucket creation
  • Applied least privilege principles to IAM policies
  • Remediated all overly permissive security groups
  • Enabled encryption at rest for all EBS volumes

Example 3: API Penetration Testing (GraphQL)

Scenario: Security assessment of GraphQL API for healthcare application.

Testing Methodology:

  1. Introspection Analysis: Schema reconstruction and query analysis
  2. Authorization Testing: BOLA/IDOR vulnerabilities
  3. DoS Testing: Query complexity and batching attacks
  4. Bypass Attempts: Authentication and rate limit bypass

Findings:

FindingSeverityExploitabilityRemediation
BOLA (Broken Object Level Authorization)CriticalEasyAdd ownership verification
Introspection EnabledMediumN/ADisable in production
Query Depth Limit MissingHighEasyImplement max depth
No Rate LimitingHighEasyAdd rate limiting

Demonstrated Impact:

  • Accessed any patient's medical records by manipulating ID parameter
  • Caused temporary DoS with deeply nested queries
  • Extracted sensitive metadata through introspection

Best Practices

Reconnaissance and Discovery

  • Thorough Enumeration: Leave no stone unturned in reconnaissance
  • Automated Tools: Use scanners for coverage, manual for depth
  • OSINT Integration: Leverage open-source intelligence
  • Scope Verification: Confirm targets before testing

Vulnerability Assessment

  • Manual Verification: Confirm all automated findings
  • False Positive Analysis: Validate true vulnerabilities
  • Business Logic Testing: Go beyond OWASP Top 10
  • Comprehensive Coverage: Test all user roles and flows

Exploitation and Validation

  • Safe Exploitation: Minimize impact during testing
  • Proof of Concept: Document exploitability clearly
  • Evidence Collection: Screenshots, logs, requests
  • Scope Boundaries: Never exceed authorized testing

Reporting and Communication

  • Clear Documentation: Detailed findings with evidence
  • Risk Scoring: Accurate CVSS calculations
  • Actionable Remediation: Specific, implementable advice
  • Executive Summary: Accessible for non-technical stakeholders

Quality Checklist

Preparation:

  • Scope: Signed RoE (Rules of Engagement) and Authorization letter.
  • Access: Credentials/VPN access verified.
  • Backups: Confirmed client has backups (if applicable).
  • Legal: Confirmed testing dates and boundaries in writing.

Execution:

  • Coverage: All user roles tested (Admin, User, Unauth).
  • Validation: All scanner findings manually verified.
  • Evidence: Screenshots/Logs collected for every finding.
  • Safety: Test data cleaned up, no permanent damage.

Reporting:

  • Clarity: Executive summary understandable by non-tech stakeholders.
  • Risk: CVSS scores calculated accurately.
  • Remediation: Actionable, specific advice (not just "Fix it").
  • Cleanup: Test data/accounts removed from target system.
  • Timeline: Findings delivered within agreed timeframe.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

04

需要参考平台分布和安装热度时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Claude Code

31.13%
按下载量换算433

OpenCode

23.38%
按下载量换算325

Codex

18.21%
按下载量换算253

Gemini CLI

12.77%
按下载量换算178

Antigravity

8.17%
按下载量换算114

windsurf

3.78%
按下载量换算53

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

可疑

Socket

可疑

Snyk

未通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/404kidwiz/claude-supercode-skills --skill penetration-tester;npx skills add 404kidwiz/claude-supercode-skills --skill "penetration-tester" 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills