CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

dependency-audit

Audit project dependencies, frameworks, languages, and dev tools for known vulnerabilities, CVEs, and security anti-patterns. Use when the user mentions 'dependency audit,' 'npm audit,' 'CVE,' 'vulnerable packages,' 'supply chain security,' 'outdated dependencies,' 'known vulnerabilities,' 'security advisory,' 'package security,' 'framework vulnerability,' 'is this package safe,' or needs to check whether their stack has known security issues.

65

Quality

78%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/dependency-audit/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Dependency Audit — Framework, Package, and Toolchain Security

Audit project dependencies, frameworks, language runtimes, and dev tools for known vulnerabilities (CVEs), security anti-patterns, and supply chain risks.

Methodology

Step 1: Inventory the Stack

Identify everything in use — not just direct dependencies but the full chain:

Package manifests — read and catalog:

Node/JS:    package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml
Python:     requirements.txt, Pipfile.lock, pyproject.toml, poetry.lock
Ruby:       Gemfile, Gemfile.lock
Go:         go.mod, go.sum
Rust:       Cargo.toml, Cargo.lock
Java:       pom.xml, build.gradle
PHP:        composer.json, composer.lock
.NET:       *.csproj, packages.config

Framework and runtime versions:

  • Check framework version (Next.js, Django, Rails, Spring, Laravel, Express, etc.)
  • Check language/runtime version (Node.js, Python, Ruby, Go, Java, PHP, .NET)
  • Check infrastructure tools (Docker base images, Terraform providers, Kubernetes versions)

Dev tools and CI/CD:

  • Check CI/CD pipeline configs (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, Jenkinsfile)
  • Check pre-commit hooks, linters, formatters
  • Check container base images and their update status
  • Check IaC tool versions (Terraform, Pulumi, CDK)

Step 2: Run Automated Audit Tools

Run the appropriate audit command for the project:

# Node.js
npm audit
npm audit --json  # For structured output

# Python
pip audit          # If pip-audit installed
safety check       # If safety installed

# Ruby
bundle audit

# Go
govulncheck ./...

# Rust
cargo audit

# PHP
composer audit

# .NET
dotnet list package --vulnerable

# Docker
docker scout cves <image>
trivy image <image>

# General (if Trivy is available)
trivy fs .

Step 3: Research Framework-Specific Known Issues

Beyond CVEs in packages, check for known vulnerability patterns specific to the framework in use. Search for recent advisories and common misconfiguration issues.

Next.js / React:

  • Server Actions exposing internal endpoints (pre-14.1.1 middleware bypass CVE-2025-29927)
  • dangerouslySetInnerHTML without sanitization
  • SSRF through image optimization (next/image with unrestricted domains)
  • Exposed .env files in public directory or client bundle (NEXT_PUBLIC_ prefix leaking secrets)
  • Middleware auth bypass patterns — check middleware.ts matches all protected routes
  • Server Component / Client Component boundary leaking server-only data
  • Outdated next.config.js security headers

Django:

  • DEBUG=True in production
  • ALLOWED_HOSTS misconfigured (wildcard *)
  • Missing CSRF middleware or @csrf_exempt on state-changing views
  • Raw SQL via extra(), raw(), or RawSQL without parameterization
  • Pickle deserialization in sessions (use JSON serializer)
  • Secret key committed to source control

Rails:

  • Mass assignment without strong parameters
  • SQL injection via where("column = '#{input}'")
  • Unpatched Action Pack, Action View, or Active Record CVEs
  • Insecure deserialization in cookies (verify secret_key_base rotation)
  • CSRF token bypass in API-only mode

Express / Node.js:

  • Prototype pollution through Object.assign, lodash.merge, deep-extend
  • ReDoS (Regular Expression Denial of Service) in validation patterns
  • Path traversal through req.params in file serving routes
  • Missing rate limiting on auth endpoints
  • eval() or Function() with user input
  • Event loop blocking with synchronous operations

Spring / Java:

  • Spring4Shell and related RCE vulnerabilities
  • Deserialization attacks (Java native serialization, Jackson polymorphic types)
  • SpEL injection in Spring Expression Language
  • Missing CSRF protection on state-changing endpoints
  • Actuator endpoints exposed without authentication

Laravel / PHP:

  • APP_DEBUG=true in production (leaks env vars in error pages)
  • SQL injection via raw DB queries without bindings
  • Mass assignment without $fillable / $guarded
  • File upload without type validation (PHP execution via uploaded .php)
  • Insecure deserialization in queued jobs

WordPress:

  • Outdated core, theme, or plugin versions (most common attack vector)
  • File editor enabled in wp-admin (allows code injection if admin is compromised)
  • XML-RPC enabled (brute force amplification, SSRF)
  • Default admin username, weak passwords
  • Unpatched plugin vulnerabilities (check WPScan database)

Step 4: Check for Supply Chain Risks

Beyond known CVEs, look for supply chain attack indicators:

Dependency confusion / substitution:

  • Private package names that could be claimed on public registries
  • Missing .npmrc or pip.conf scoping to private registry
  • No lockfile integrity verification

Typosquatting:

  • Package names that are close misspellings of popular packages
  • Recently published packages with very few downloads
  • Packages that changed ownership recently

Malicious packages:

  • Postinstall scripts that make network requests or execute code (scripts.postinstall in package.json)
  • Packages with obfuscated code
  • Excessive permission requests relative to functionality

Maintenance risk:

  • Unmaintained packages (no commits in 2+ years, archived repos)
  • Single-maintainer packages for critical functionality
  • Packages with known but unpatched vulnerabilities (maintainer unresponsive)

Lockfile integrity:

  • Is the lockfile committed to source control?
  • Does CI install from the lockfile (npm ci not npm install, pip install --require-hashes)?
  • Are integrity hashes present and verified?

Step 5: Check Dev Tool and CI/CD Security

GitHub Actions:

  • pull_request_target trigger with checkout of PR code (code injection risk)
  • Secrets accessible in forked PR workflows
  • Unpinned action versions (uses: actions/checkout@main vs @v4.1.0 or SHA pin)
  • Script injection via ${{ github.event.issue.title }} in run: blocks

Docker:

  • Running as root in container (missing USER directive)
  • Base image with known CVEs (check with trivy or docker scout)
  • Secrets baked into image layers (visible via docker history)
  • latest tag instead of pinned version

Terraform / IaC:

  • Hardcoded secrets in .tf files
  • Unpinned provider versions
  • Missing state file encryption
  • Over-permissive IAM in provider configuration

Output Format

# Dependency & Stack Security Audit
## Project: [name]
## Stack: [language, framework, key tools]
## Date: [date]

### Stack Inventory
| Component | Version | Latest | Status |
|-----------|---------|--------|--------|

### Known Vulnerabilities (CVEs)
| Package | Installed | Vuln | Severity | CVE | Fix Version |
|---------|-----------|------|----------|-----|-------------|

### Framework-Specific Issues
#### [SEVERITY] [Title]
**Component:** [framework/tool name and version]
**Issue:** [description]
**Evidence:** [code or config snippet]
**Remediation:** [specific fix]

### Supply Chain Risks
| Risk | Package/Component | Details | Remediation |
|------|-------------------|---------|-------------|

### Dev Tool / CI Security
| Tool | Issue | Severity | Remediation |
|------|-------|----------|-------------|

### Prioritized Action Plan
1. [Critical — actively exploited CVEs, RCE vulnerabilities]
2. [High — known CVEs with public exploits, supply chain risks]
3. [Medium — framework misconfigurations, outdated dependencies]
4. [Low — maintenance risks, best practice improvements]

Boundaries

  • Only audit code and configurations the user provides
  • When identifying CVEs, verify they apply to the actual installed version
  • Provide specific fix versions or remediation steps for every finding
  • Note when a vulnerability requires specific conditions to exploit (reducing effective severity)
  • Refuse to help exploit found vulnerabilities against unauthorized targets

References

  • OWASP Dependency-Check
  • National Vulnerability Database (NVD)
  • GitHub Advisory Database
  • Snyk Vulnerability Database
  • npm audit / pip-audit / bundler-audit documentation
  • SLSA (Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts) framework
Repository
briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills
Last updated
Created

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.