a2a-security-review
Review agent-to-agent (A2A) / multi-agent-system trust: peer identity and authentication, message integrity,…
Review a system or architecture design for security — trust boundaries, control selection, secure-by-design principles, defense-in-depth, and security requirements — and produce prioritized design recommendations. Use when assessing or shaping an architecture/design (not testing
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add jassics/awesome-claude-security --skill security-design-review --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add jassics/awesome-claude-security --skill security-design-review -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add jassics/awesome-claude-security --skill security-design-review -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add jassics/awesome-claude-security --skill security-design-review -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add jassics/awesome-claude-security --skill security-design-review -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add jassics/awesome-claude-security --skill security-design-review -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add jassics/awesome-claude-security --skill security-design-review -a windsurf -y
name: security-design-review description: >- Review a system or architecture design for security — trust boundaries, control selection, secure-by-design principles, defense-in-depth, and security requirements — and produce prioritized design recommendations. Use when assessing or shaping an architecture/design (not testing a running system).
A design-level security assessment: where the design is weak by construction, which controls are missing or misplaced, and the prioritized changes — caught at design time, before it's built.
1. **Architecture & trust boundaries** — components, data flows, and where trust/ privilege changes. Build/ingest the picture with `security-diagramming:architecture-diagram` / `threat-model-dfd`. 2. **Threats by design** — run `threat-modeling:stride` (or `pasta`) over the design to enumerate threats per element and boundary crossing. 3. **Control selection** — are the right controls present at the right layers (authn/authz, encryption, segmentation, input handling, logging, key/secret management)? Map controls to the threats they address; find gaps and redundancies. 4. **Secure-by-design principles** — least privilege, defense-in-depth, fail-safe defaults, complete mediation, minimize attack surface, secure defaults, separation of duties, no security-by-obscurity. 5. **Security requirements** — derive the non-negotiable requirements the build must meet (and how they'll be verified later — ties to the relevant domain plugin's testing skills). 6. **Trade-offs** — weigh risk reduction against usability, performance, and cost; recommend proportionate controls, not maximal ones.
1. Establish context: purpose, data sensitivity, users, threat model, and constraints. 2. Diagram the architecture and trust boundaries. 3. Enumerate threats (`threat-modeling`) and map existing/missing controls to them. 4. Assess against secure-by-design principles; identify design-level weaknesses. 5. Recommend prioritized changes and the security requirements for the build.
A design review: architecture diagram · threat→control mapping · design weaknesses · prioritized recommendations · security requirements (with verification method). Use `security-reporting`; rank with `threat-modeling:risk-rank`.
Fixing a design flaw on paper is far cheaper than after it ships — focus on structural weaknesses (missing boundaries, wrong trust assumptions, absent controls), not implementation bugs (those are the domain plugins' job). Recommend proportionate, layered controls and make the trade-offs explicit for the decision-maker.
A Claude Code plugin marketplace for the full cybersecurity & GenAI-security lifecycle — from recon and threat modeling to detection engineering, GRC, and CISO-level strategy. A pentester knows which OWASP test bends a broken-access-control endpoint.
Review agent-to-agent (A2A) / multi-agent-system trust: peer identity and authentication, message integrity,…
Test the agent execution harness/runtime itself — LangChain/LangGraph, AutoGen, CrewAI, custom ReAct-style loops, or…
Assess an autonomous / tool-using AI agent for security end-to-end: tool privileges, autonomy and approval boundaries, excessive…
Test what an AI agent will actually do without human confirmation, including under injected-goal / prompt-injection scenarios, to…
Review the security of MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers/clients an agent uses: server trust tier, tool/resource description…
Inventory the tools/functions an AI agent can call and audit their privileges, side effects, and approval requirements to find…
Use for authorized security assessment of REST, GraphQL, WebSocket, or SOAP APIs, including discovery, authentication,…
Extract and decrypt Windows DPAPI-protected secrets (Credential Manager, browser logins/cookies, Wi-Fi credentials, KeePass keys)…
Clean and finalize authorized natural-language text intended for readers by auditing suspicious invisible Unicode and rewriting…