competition-kernel-container-escape

Internal downstream skill for ctf-sandbox-orchestrator. CTF-sandbox workflow for kernel attack surface, namespace and cgroup boundaries, container isolation assumptions, syscall paths, and escape primitive verification. Use when the user asks to analyze container-to-host escape paths, kernel exploit prerequisites, namespace crossover, capability misuse, or prove whether an exploit primitive crosses the sandbox boundary. Use only after `$ctf-sandbox-orchestrator` has already established sandbox assumptions and routed here.

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Quality

Content

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A lean, well-organized instruction-only skill with a clear sequenced workflow, a verification checkpoint, and a correctly used one-level reference. Its only real gap is actionability: it tells Claude what to inspect but not concrete commands or tools to do so.

Suggestions

Add concrete executable commands for the isolation-mapping step (e.g. `cat /proc/self/status` for capabilities, `lsns`, `cat /proc/1/cgroup`, `unshare`/`nsenter`, `grep Seccomp /proc/self/status`) so the guidance is copy-paste ready.

Give one concrete example of capturing before/after boundary-crossing evidence (e.g. comparing `readlink /proc/self/ns/*` or process visibility before and after the primitive) to lift actionability from descriptive to procedural.

Name specific kernel-version / config discovery commands (e.g. `uname -r`, `zcat /proc/config.gz`, `lsmod`) in the surface-mapping phase rather than only listing what to note.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Lean bullet/section style with no concept explanation Claude already knows; every line carries an instruction or a concrete capture target, fully respecting the token budget.	3 / 3
Actionability	Guidance names specific targets (namespaces, cgroups, seccomp, capabilities, before/after identity) but gives no executable commands or concrete tooling/procedures to obtain them, leaving the 'how' incomplete per the instruction-only actionable bar.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Clear ordered sequence (Quick Start 1-5, Workflow phases 1-3) with an explicit verification gate ("Reproduce one minimal primitive-to-boundary-crossing chain") and a routing decision (credential-replay handoff), satisfying the checkpoint expectation.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Body is a concise overview with a single, clearly signaled one-level-deep reference ("Load `references/kernel-container-escape.md`"), and that file exists with supporting checklists — well-structured and easy to navigate.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A tightly scoped, third-person description that names concrete capabilities and supplies explicit 'Use when' triggers with clear routing dependency. It is concise yet complete and unlikely to fire for the wrong skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions — "analyze container-to-host escape paths, kernel exploit prerequisites, namespace crossover, capability misuse, or prove whether an exploit primitive crosses the sandbox boundary" — matching the multi-action anchor; third-person voice, no fluff.	3 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly states what ("kernel attack surface, namespace and cgroup boundaries, container isolation assumptions, syscall paths, and escape primitive verification") and when ("Use when the user asks to..."), so both halves are clearly answered.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural trigger phrases a CTF/security user would actually say ("container-to-host escape paths", "namespace crossover", "capability misuse", "kernel exploit prerequisites") with good coverage and not just generic jargon.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Narrow niche (kernel container escape) with distinct triggers plus explicit scoping ("Use only after `$ctf-sandbox-orchestrator` has already established sandbox assumptions"), making conflict with sibling skills unlikely.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: zhaoxuya520/reverse-skill
Path: CTF-Sandbox-Orchestrator/competition-kernel-container-escape/SKILL.md
Commit: 6aa1362

Reviewed: 7 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.