auditing— agent skill

auditing — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.

by OdradekAI·Agent Skill·github.com/OdradekAI/bundles-forge

Is auditing safe to install?

SaferSkills independently audited auditing (Agent Skill) and scored it 74/100 (yellow). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 3 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.

Score
74/100
●●●●●●●○○○
↑ +0 since first scan (74 → 74)Re-scan~30s
Latest scan
ScannedJun 23, 2026 · 30d ago
Scans run1 over 90 days
Detectors55 checks · 5 categories
Findings0 warnings · 3 high
EngineSaferSkills 755a9a5
View methodology →
SaferSkills installs
This week0
This month0
All time0
CategoryWeightCategory scoreContribution
Securityprompt, exec, net, exfil, eval
35%
25
8.8 pts
Supply chainhash, typosquat, maintainer, lockfile
20%
100
20.0 pts
Maintenancestaleness, pinning, CI
15%
100
15.0 pts
TransparencySKILL.md, perms, README
15%
100
15.0 pts
Communityinstalls, verify, response
15%
100
15.0 pts

Findings & checks · 3 flagged

Securityscore 25 · 3 findings
HIGH"Ignore previous instructions" command embedded in the skillSS-SKILL-INJECT-IGNORE-01 · Prompt injection · skills/auditing/references/audit-checks.json
HIGHwhen it fires on hostile content the impact is full system-prompt override.
Why it matters

The text {match} is the classic direct prompt-injection phrasing. Placed in a skill body that the agent reads as trusted instructions, it tries to make the agent abandon its prior rules and follow whatever comes next — a full system-prompt override.

The exact value spotted
excerptskills/auditing/references/audit-checks.json· json
101{"id": "SC7", "category": "security/skill_content", "group": "Destructive Operation Pattern
… (106 chars elided on L101)
102{"id": "SC8", "category": "security/skill_content", "group": "Destructive Operation Pattern
… (106 chars elided on L102)
103{"id": "SC9", "category": "security/skill_content", "group": "Safety Override Patterns",
… (106 chars elided on L103)
104{"id": "SC10", "category": "security/skill_content", "group": "Safety Override Patterns",
… (105 chars elided on L104)
105{"id": "SC11", "category": "security/skill_content", "group": "Safety Override Patterns",
… (106 chars elided on L105)
Occurrences
1 occurrence · at L103
How to fix
Remove the override phrase, or rephrase the passage so it does not instruct the agent to discard its rules.
  1. Delete the ignore/disregard/forget … previous instructions sentence.
  2. If this is jailbreak-research or tutorial content, move the example into a clearly fenced, non-instruction block and label it as a quoted sample.
Framework references
OWASPLLM01ATLASAML.T0051
Trace & refs
ruleSS-SKILL-INJECT-IGNORE-01sha2562e4221a7f996a729rubric 365aacaView on GitHub
HIGH"Ignore previous instructions" command embedded in the skillSS-SKILL-INJECT-IGNORE-01 · Prompt injection · skills/auditing/references/skill-checklist.md
HIGHwhen it fires on hostile content the impact is full system-prompt override.
Why it matters

The text {match} is the classic direct prompt-injection phrasing. Placed in a skill body that the agent reads as trusted instructions, it tries to make the agent abandon its prior rules and follow whatever comes next — a full system-prompt override.

The exact value spotted
excerptskills/auditing/references/skill-checklist.md· markdown
108|-------|------|----------|------------|
109| SC1 | Critical | Instructions to read `.env`, `.ssh/`, `credentials`, `secrets`, `tokens`,
… (53 chars elided on L109)
110| SC9 | Critical | Phrases like "ignore previous instructions", "override safety", "disable
… (37 chars elided on L110)
111| SC13 | Critical | Unicode homoglyphs, zero-width characters, right-to-left override charac
… (28 chars elided on L111)
112| SC15 | Info | Excessively long line (>500 chars) — may indicate obfuscated or machine-gene
… (37 chars elided on L112)
Occurrences
1 occurrence · at L110
How to fix
Remove the override phrase, or rephrase the passage so it does not instruct the agent to discard its rules.
  1. Delete the ignore/disregard/forget … previous instructions sentence.
  2. If this is jailbreak-research or tutorial content, move the example into a clearly fenced, non-instruction block and label it as a quoted sample.
Framework references
OWASPLLM01ATLASAML.T0051
Trace & refs
ruleSS-SKILL-INJECT-IGNORE-01sha2562e4221a7f996a729rubric 365aacaView on GitHub
HIGH"Ignore previous instructions" command embedded in the skillSS-SKILL-INJECT-IGNORE-01 · Prompt injection · skills/auditing/references/security-checklist.md
HIGHwhen it fires on hostile content the impact is full system-prompt override.
Why it matters

The text {match} is the classic direct prompt-injection phrasing. Placed in a skill body that the agent reads as trusted instructions, it tries to make the agent abandon its prior rules and follow whatever comes next — a full system-prompt override.

The exact value spotted
excerptskills/auditing/references/security-checklist.md· markdown
73| Check | Risk | Pattern | Automation |
74|-------|------|---------|------------|
75| SC9 | Critical | Phrases like "ignore previous instructions", "override safety", "disable
… (37 chars elided on L75)
76| SC10 | Critical | Instructions to skip git hooks (`--no-verify`), bypass linters, or disab
… (32 chars elided on L76)
77| SC11 | Warning | Instructions that conflict with `using-<project>` instruction priority (c
… (84 chars elided on L77)
Occurrences
1 occurrence · at L75
How to fix
Remove the override phrase, or rephrase the passage so it does not instruct the agent to discard its rules.
  1. Delete the ignore/disregard/forget … previous instructions sentence.
  2. If this is jailbreak-research or tutorial content, move the example into a clearly fenced, non-instruction block and label it as a quoted sample.
Framework references
OWASPLLM01ATLASAML.T0051
Trace & refs
ruleSS-SKILL-INJECT-IGNORE-01sha2562e4221a7f996a729rubric 365aacaView on GitHub
Supply chainscore 100 · 0 findings
All supply chain checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Maintenancescore 100 · 0 findings
All maintenance checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Transparencyscore 100 · 0 findings
All transparency checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Communityscore 100 · 0 findings
All community checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Vendor response · right of reply
Are you the maintainer? Submit a response →

Audit the pieces. Scan the whole. Decide.

~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.