BB ctf-malware
Provides malware analysis and network traffic techniques for CTF challenges. Use when analyzing obfuscated scripts, malicious packages, custom crypto protocols, C2 traffic, PE/.NET binaries, RC4/AES encrypted communications, YARA rules, shellcode analysis, memory forensics for malware (Volatility malfind, process injection detection), anti-analysis techniques (VM/sandbox detection, timing evasion, API hashing, process injection, environment checks), or extracting malware configurations and indicators of compromise.
As a process B 66/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, running it twice
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill contains commands that delete files, rewrite disks or execute code fetched from the network. The agent may run them without asking if it believes the instructions require it.
Replace destructive commands with safe equivalents that ask for confirmation, scope them to one folder, and stop piping curl into a shell: pin a version and a checksum.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 18
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 18
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-persistencec2-and-protocols.md:189Persistence mechanism (cron / launchd / scheduled task / autorun registry) (documentation of a security skill)# Registry: HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
security skill -
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Bash Read Write Edit Glob Grep Task WebFetch WebSearch
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityc2-and-protocols.md:67Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Commands: reverse shell, file download, process list
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityc2-and-protocols.md:177Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# DarkComet keylogger log locations:
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityc2-and-protocols.md:185Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Dump the keylogger files
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityc2-and-protocols.md:201Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)**Key insight:** DarkComet stores offline keylogger data in `.dc` files under `%APPDATA%/dclogs/` with date-stamped filenames. These survive in memory dumps and can be carved with Volatility's filesca
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityc2-and-protocols.md:226Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# Shows: C2 server, sleep time, jitter, URI paths, user-agent, watermark
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitype-and-dotnet.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# PE, .NET, and Binary Malware Analysis
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitype-and-dotnet.md:8Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- [.NET Malware Analysis (C2 Extraction)](#net-…ion)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitype-and-dotnet.md:70Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)## .NET Malware Analysis (C2 Extraction)
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityskill-card.md:2Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)Provides malware analysis and network traffic techniques for CTF challenges. <br>
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityskill-card.md:28Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- [PE, .NET, and Binary Malware Analysis](pe-and-dotnet.md) <br>
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:3Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)description: Provides malware analysis and network traffic techniques for CTF challenges. Use when analyzing obfuscated scripts, malicious packages, custom crypto protocols, C2 traffic, PE/.NET binari
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:13Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)Quick reference for malware analysis CTF challenges. Each technique has a one-liner here; see supporting files for full details with code.
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:126Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)## .NET Malware Analysis
A further 3 matches are quotations in this security skill's documentation and are not counted as findings.
Files scanned: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 66/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 22 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1784 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 25 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 520: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 26 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 22 items
- +4Has examples (8 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.