sast-hardcodedsecrets-3719e5 — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited sast-hardcodedsecrets-3719e5 (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
You are performing a focused security assessment to find hardcoded sensitive data that is exposed in publicly accessible code. This skill uses a three-phase approach with subagents: recon (find all potential secret candidates), batched verify (confirm each is a real secret in publicly reachable code, in parallel batches of 3), and merge (consolidate batch reports into one file).
Prerequisites: sast/architecture.md must exist. Run the analysis skill first if it doesn't.
Hardcoded secrets are sensitive credentials — API keys, access tokens, private keys, passwords, signing secrets, database connection strings — embedded directly in source code as string literals.
This skill focuses specifically on secrets that end up in publicly accessible code, meaning an attacker can extract them without any server-side access. A secret hardcoded in backend server code is bad practice but not directly exploitable by an external attacker inspecting the deployed application. A secret hardcoded in frontend JavaScript or a mobile app binary is directly extractable.
The core question: Can an external attacker obtain this secret from the deployed application without server access?
These code paths are accessible to attackers after deployment:
.js, .ts, .jsx, .tsx file that runs in the browser. This includes:"use client" or files under app/ without "use server")public/, static/, or assets/ directoriesutils/ or lib/ folder)<script> blocks, data- attributes, meta tagspublic/, static/, assets/, www/ directoriesDo not flag secrets in these locations — they are not publicly accessible:
app/api/ routes, Nuxt server routes, SvelteKit +server.ts files.env, .env.local, .env.production (unless served statically)config/database.yml, settings.py, application.properties, appsettings.json.github/workflows/, Jenkinsfile, .gitlab-ci.ymlDockerfile, docker-compose.yml, Kubernetes manifestsThis is critical and requires understanding the project architecture:
Next.js: Files under app/ with "use client" directive or without "use server" are client components. Files under app/api/ are server-only. Files under pages/api/ are server-only. Files under pages/ (non-api) render on both server and client — secrets here ARE exposed. next.config.js runs server-side only but NEXT_PUBLIC_* env vars are embedded in client bundles.
Nuxt.js: Files under pages/, components/, composables/ are client-accessible. Files under server/ are server-only.
React (CRA/Vite): Everything in src/ is bundled for the client. REACT_APP_* and VITE_* env vars are embedded in client builds.
Angular: Everything in src/ is bundled for the client.
Vue (Vite): Everything in src/ is bundled for the client. VITE_* env vars are embedded.
Express/Fastify/Koa: All server-side unless serving static files from a public/ or static/ directory.
Django/Flask: Python code is server-side. Templates are rendered server-side (secrets in template context don't reach the client unless explicitly rendered into JS). Static files in static/ are client-accessible.
Rails: Ruby code is server-side. Assets in app/assets/javascripts/ or app/javascript/ are client-accessible.
Mobile apps: ALL source code is considered publicly accessible via reverse engineering.
These have distinctive formats that make them identifiable with high confidence:
| Secret Type | Pattern | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AWS Access Key ID | AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16} | ||||
| AWS Secret Access Key | 40-character base64 string near an AKIA key | ||||
| Google API Key | AIza[0-9A-Za-z\\-_]{35} | ||||
| Google OAuth Client Secret | GOCSPX-[0-9A-Za-z\\-_]{28} | ||||
| GitHub Personal Access Token | ghp_[0-9A-Za-z]{36}, github_pat_[0-9A-Za-z_]{82} | ||||
| GitHub OAuth App Secret | gho_[0-9A-Za-z]{36} | ||||
| GitLab Personal Access Token | glpat-[0-9A-Za-z\\-_]{20} | ||||
| Slack Bot/User Token | xoxb-[0-9A-Za-z\\-]+, xoxp-[0-9A-Za-z\\-]+ | ||||
| Slack Webhook URL | hooks.slack.com/services/T[A-Z0-9]+/B[A-Z0-9]+/[A-Za-z0-9]+ | ||||
| Stripe Secret Key | sk_live_[0-9A-Za-z]{24,} | ||||
| Stripe Publishable Key | pk_live_[0-9A-Za-z]{24,} (publishable keys are designed for client-side — skip unless paired with a secret key) | ||||
| Twilio Account SID + Auth Token | AC[0-9a-f]{32} (SID), 32-hex auth token nearby | ||||
| SendGrid API Key | SG\.[0-9A-Za-z\\-_]{22}\.[0-9A-Za-z\\-_]{43} | ||||
| Mailgun API Key | key-[0-9a-zA-Z]{32} | ||||
| Firebase Config | apiKey, authDomain, projectId together in a config object — only flag if it includes a server/admin key, not the standard client config | ||||
| Private RSA/EC/SSH Key | `-----BEGIN (RSA | EC | OPENSSH | DSA | PGP )?PRIVATE KEY-----` |
| JWT Secret / Signing Key | String assigned to variables like JWT_SECRET, jwt_secret, signingKey, HMAC_KEY | ||||
| Database Connection String with Password | postgresql://user:pass@, mysql://user:pass@, mongodb://user:pass@, redis://:pass@ | ||||
| Generic API Key Assignment | Variable named *api_key*, *apiKey*, *API_KEY*, *secret*, *SECRET*, *token*, *TOKEN*, *password*, *PASSWORD* assigned a string literal that looks like a real credential | ||||
| Heroku API Key | [0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12} in a Heroku context | ||||
| Azure Storage Key | Base64 string ~88 chars assigned to storage account key variables | ||||
| OpenAI API Key | sk-[A-Za-z0-9]{48} or sk-proj-[A-Za-z0-9\\-_]{100,} | ||||
| Anthropic API Key | sk-ant-[A-Za-z0-9\\-_]{90,} |
Search for variables/constants with these name patterns and check if the assigned value looks like a real credential:
api_key, apiKey, API_KEY, ApiKeysecret, SECRET, secret_key, secretKey, SECRET_KEYaccess_token, accessToken, ACCESS_TOKENauth_token, authToken, AUTH_TOKENprivate_key, privateKey, PRIVATE_KEYpassword, PASSWORD, passwd, PASSWDclient_secret, clientSecret, CLIENT_SECRETsigning_key, signingKey, SIGNING_KEYencryption_key, encryptionKey, ENCRYPTION_KEYbearer_token, BEARER_TOKENcredentials, CREDENTIALSconnection_string, connectionString, DATABASE_URL"your-api-key-here", "TODO", "xxx", "changeme", "REPLACE_ME", "INSERT_KEY", "<api_key>", "dummy", "test", "example", "sample", "placeholder""", ''process.env.API_KEY, os.environ["SECRET"], ENV["KEY"] — these read from the environment at runtime, not hardcodedpk_test_*, pk_live_*; Firebase client config apiKey (designed for client-side use); Google Maps client key (restricted by HTTP referrer)sk_test_* (Stripe test), keys in files clearly named as test fixturesinterface Config { apiKey: string } — no actual valueThis skill runs in three phases using subagents. Pass the contents of sast/architecture.md to all subagents as context.
Launch a subagent with the following instructions:
Goal: Find every location in the codebase where a hardcoded secret (API key, access token, private key, password, signing secret, connection string) appears as a string literal. Write results to sast/hardcodedsecrets-recon.md.>
Context: You will be given the project's architecture summary. Use it to understand the tech stack, project structure, and which files are frontend vs. backend.
>
What to search for:
>
Scan the entire codebase. At this stage, flag ALL potential secrets regardless of whether they are in frontend or backend code — the filtering happens in Phase 2.
>
1. High-confidence regex patterns — search for these distinctive formats: - AWS keys:AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16}- Google API keys:AIza[0-9A-Za-z\-_]{35}- GitHub tokens:ghp_,github_pat_,gho_,ghs_- Slack tokens:xoxb-,xoxp-,xoxa-,xoxr-- Stripe secret keys:sk_live_,sk_test_- SendGrid keys:SG\.- OpenAI keys:sk-followed by 48+ alphanumeric characters - Anthropic keys:sk-ant-- Private key headers:-----BEGIN.*PRIVATE KEY------ Connection strings with embedded passwords:://[^:]+:[^@]+@
>
2. Variable assignment patterns — search for variables with secret-related names assigned string literal values: - Search for patterns like:apiKey = "...",api_key = '...',API_KEY: "...",secret: "...",token = "...",password = "...",client_secret = "..."- Include all casing conventions: camelCase, snake_case, SCREAMING_SNAKE_CASE, PascalCase - Look in JS/TS objects, JSON files, YAML/TOML config, Python dicts, environment-like configs
>
3. Inline string literals that match known key formats: - Long random alphanumeric strings (32+ characters) assigned to auth-related variables - Base64-encoded strings in authentication contexts - Hex strings (64+ characters) used as keys or secrets - UUIDs used as API keys or secrets
>
What to skip during recon: - Environment variable reads:process.env.*,os.environ[*],ENV[*],System.getenv(*)— these are not hardcoded - Type definitions with no values:apiKey: string,type Config = { secret: string }- Obvious placeholders:"your-key-here","TODO","xxx","changeme","REPLACE_ME","<api_key>","dummy","test-key","example","sample", empty strings - Comments that merely describe or document secrets - Public keys (non-private cryptographic keys) - Hash values used as checksums or content identifiers - Files in.git/,node_modules/,vendor/,venv/,__pycache__/,dist/,build/directories
>
Output format — write to sast/hardcodedsecrets-recon.md:>
```markdown # Hardcoded Secrets Recon: [Project Name]
>
## Summary Found [N] potential hardcoded secret candidates.
>
## Candidates
>
### 1. [Descriptive name — e.g., "AWS Access Key in API config"] - File:path/to/file.ext(lines X-Y) - Secret type: [AWS key / Google API key / Generic API key / Private key / Password / JWT secret / Connection string / etc.] - Variable/context: [variable name or context where the secret appears] - Detection method: [regex match / variable name pattern / inline literal] - Code snippet: ``[Show the line(s) containing the secret — REDACT the middle portion of the actual value, e.g., "AKIA****EXAMPLE" or "sk_live_****abcd"]``
>
[Repeat for each candidate] ```
After Phase 1 completes, read sast/hardcodedsecrets-recon.md. If the recon found zero candidates (the summary reports "Found 0" or the "Candidates" section is empty or absent), skip Phase 2 and Phase 3 entirely. Instead, write the following content to sast/hardcodedsecrets-results.md and stop:
# Hardcoded Secrets Analysis Results
No vulnerabilities found.Only proceed to Phase 2 if Phase 1 found at least one candidate.
After Phase 1 completes, read sast/hardcodedsecrets-recon.md and split the candidates into batches of up to 3 candidates each. Launch one subagent per batch in parallel. Each subagent verifies only its assigned candidates and writes results to its own batch file.
Batching procedure (you, the orchestrator, do this — not a subagent):
sast/hardcodedsecrets-recon.md and count the numbered candidate sections (### 1., ### 2., etc.).sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-N.md where N is the 1-based batch number.Give each batch subagent the following instructions (substitute the batch-specific values):
Goal: Verify the following hardcoded secret candidates. For each one, determine (1) whether it is a real secret and (2) whether it is in publicly accessible code. Write results to sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-[N].md.>
Your assigned candidates (from the recon phase):
>
[Paste the full text of the assigned candidate sections here, preserving the original numbering]
>
Context: You will be given the project's architecture summary. Use it to understand the tech stack, frontend/backend separation, build pipeline, and which directories contain client-side vs. server-side code.
>
For each candidate, answer TWO questions:
>
Question 1: Is this a real secret?
>
Check whether the value is an actual credential vs. a false positive: - Does the string have the entropy and format of a real key/token? (Real API keys are typically 20+ random characters) - Is it a known placeholder or example value? ("your-key-here", "changeme", "test", "example", "TODO", "xxx", "REPLACE_ME", etc.) - Is it a test/development key? (Stripesk_test_*, sandbox credentials, keys in test fixtures) - Is it a public/publishable key by design? (Stripepk_live_*, Firebase clientapiKey, Google Maps browser key) - Is it actually an environment variable reference that got picked up by mistake? - Is it a hash, checksum, or non-secret identifier?
>
If the value is NOT a real secret, classify as Not Vulnerable and explain why.
>
Question 2: Is this in publicly accessible code?
>
Determine whether an external attacker can extract this secret from the deployed application:
>
PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE (report these): - Frontend JavaScript/TypeScript that runs in the browser (React, Angular, Vue, Svelte components/pages) - Next.js client components (files with"use client"or client-rendered pages) - Nuxt.jspages/,components/, client-sideplugins/- Any.js/.tsfile that is imported by a client-side entry point (trace the import chain) - Files inpublic/,static/,assets/,www/directories that are served directly - HTML files with inline<script>blocks - Mobile app source code — Android (Java/Kotlin), iOS (Swift/Objective-C), React Native JS, Flutter Dart, Xamarin C# — ALL mobile code is extractable via reverse engineering - Electron app source (extractable from ASAR) - Client-side configuration objects embedded in JavaScript (e.g., Firebase config, analytics init)
>
NOT PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE (do not report): - Server-side route handlers (Express, Django, Flask, Rails, Spring, Go, PHP controllers) - Server-side API routes (Next.jsapp/api/, Nuxtserver/, SvelteKit+server.ts) - Backend services, middleware, utilities only imported by server code -.envfiles, server config files, Docker/CI files - Test files and fixtures not shipped to clients - Database migrations - Build scripts and tooling
>
How to determine if a file is client-side: 1. Check the file path — is it under a client-side directory? (src/in CRA/Vite React,pages/in Next.js,app/in Angular,src/in Vue) 2. Trace the import chain — is this file imported (directly or transitively) by a client-side entry point? 3. Check for server-only markers —"use server"directive, file underapi/orserver/directories 4. Checksast/architecture.mdfor the project's frontend/backend separation pattern 5. For ambiguous cases (e.g., shared utility files), err on the side of caution — if it COULD be bundled for the client, treat it as publicly accessible
>
If the secret is NOT in publicly accessible code, classify as Not Vulnerable and explain why (e.g., "Server-side only — Express route handler").
>
Classification: - Vulnerable: Confirmed real secret in confirmed publicly accessible code. An attacker can extract this from the deployed application. - Likely Vulnerable: Appears to be a real secret and the file is likely client-accessible, but cannot fully confirm one or both conditions (e.g., ambiguous import chain, uncertain if the value is a real production key). - Not Vulnerable: Either not a real secret (placeholder, test key, public key) OR not in publicly accessible code (backend-only). - Needs Manual Review: Cannot determine if the value is a real secret or if the file reaches the client — requires human judgment.
>
Output format — write to sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-[N].md:>
```markdown # Hardcoded Secrets Batch [N] Results
>
## Findings
>
### [VULNERABLE] Descriptive name - File:path/to/file.ext(lines X-Y) - Secret type: [AWS key / Google API key / etc.] - Exposure path: [How an attacker extracts it — e.g., "Bundled into client JS via Webpack, visible in browser DevTools Sources tab" or "Embedded in Android APK, extractable viaapktool d app.apk"] - Issue: [Clear description — e.g., "AWS access key hardcoded in React component that is bundled for the browser"] - Impact: [What an attacker can do with this secret — e.g., "Full access to AWS S3 buckets, potential data exfiltration", "Send emails via SendGrid on behalf of the organization", "Access user data via the API"] - Evidence: ``[Code snippet with the secret value partially redacted]`- **Remediation**: [Move the secret to a server-side environment variable. If the client needs to call this API, proxy through your backend. For mobile apps, use a backend proxy or OAuth flow instead of embedding keys.] - **Verification Steps**:`[How to confirm this finding: - For web apps: "Open browser DevTools > Sources > search for 'AKIA' in bundled JS files" - For mobile apps: "Runapktool d app.apkand grep for the key pattern" - For Electron: "Extract ASAR archive and search for the key"]``
>
### [LIKELY VULNERABLE] Descriptive name - File:path/to/file.ext(lines X-Y) - Secret type: [type] - Exposure path: [Best guess at how it reaches the client] - Issue: [What's uncertain] - Concern: [Why it's still a risk] - Evidence: ``[Code snippet]`` - Remediation: [Fix recommendation]
>
### [NOT VULNERABLE] Descriptive name - File: path/to/file.ext (lines X-Y) - Reason: [e.g., "Placeholder value — 'your-api-key-here'" or "Server-side only — Django view, never reaches the client" or "Stripe publishable key — designed for client use"]>
### [NEEDS MANUAL REVIEW] Descriptive name - File: path/to/file.ext (lines X-Y) - Uncertainty: [Why automated analysis couldn't determine the status] - Suggestion: [What to check manually] ```After all Phase 2 batch subagents complete, read every sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-*.md file and merge them into a single sast/hardcodedsecrets-results.md. You (the orchestrator) do this directly — no subagent needed.
Merge procedure:
sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-1.md, sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-2.md, ... files.sast/hardcodedsecrets-results.md using this format:# Hardcoded Secrets Analysis Results: [Project Name]
## Executive Summary
- Candidates analyzed: [total across all batches]
- Vulnerable: [N]
- Likely Vulnerable: [N]
- Not Vulnerable: [N]
- Needs Manual Review: [N]
## Findings
[All findings from all batches, grouped by classification:
VULNERABLE first, then LIKELY VULNERABLE, then NEEDS MANUAL REVIEW, then NOT VULNERABLE.
Preserve every field from the batch results exactly as written.]sast/hardcodedsecrets-results.md, delete all intermediate batch files (sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-*.md).sast/architecture.md and pass its content to all subagents as context.src/utils/config.ts might be imported by both server and client code. Check who imports it. If ANY client-side code path imports it, the secrets are exposed.apktool/jadx, IPAs can be inspected, JS bundles in React Native are plaintext.apiKey, authDomain, projectId, etc.) is designed for client-side use and protected by Firebase Security Rules. Only flag Firebase admin/service account keys or server keys (e.g., FIREBASE_ADMIN_SDK, service account JSON with private_key).pk_live_* and pk_test_* are designed for client-side use. Only flag sk_live_* and sk_test_* (secret keys)., REACT_APP_`, `VITE_ env vars**: These are embedded into client bundles at build time. If the code references process.env.NEXT_PUBLIC_API_KEY, that IS client-accessible — but the actual hardcoded value would be in the .env` file, which is typically gitignored. Only flag if the actual secret value is hardcoded in source code, not if it's read from an env var.AKIA****WXYZ, sk_live_****abcd). Never write the full secret value in the results file.sast/hardcodedsecrets-recon.md and all sast/hardcodedsecrets-batch-*.md files after the final sast/hardcodedsecrets-results.md is written.~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.