Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

scope-discipline

Use when about to send a request to, scan, enumerate, exploit, or otherwise interact with any host, IP, URL, or asset — before the first packet reaches a target

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md2.5 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Scope Discipline

Overview

The Iron Law: No target without authorization. Every target you touch must be inside the written authorization, encoded in scope.json. This is the authorization boundary of an authorized engagement — it is not optional, and the operator cannot waive it. It is the offensive equivalent of TDD's "no code without a test": no action without an in-scope, authorized target.

Violating the letter of this rule is violating its spirit.

The rule

Before touching ANY target, confirm it is in scope:

python skills/coding-mastery/scripts/_lib/scope_guard.py check <target> --scope .engage/scope/scope.json
# exit 0 = in-scope (proceed) | exit 3 = OUT (stop) | exit 2 = error (stop)

For outward actions, gate through action_guard.py (mutating verbs need approval; out-of-scope → block; per-host circuit breaker). Bash scripts source lib.sh and call _in_scope.

scope.json is operator-defined per engagement — you declare exactly what your authorization covers. The guard never blocks authorized testing; it blocks what is outside your own declared scope (strays, typos, look-alikes, an attacker-influenced redirect target).

Red Flags — STOP, do not send the request

  • "This subdomain is obviously theirs" (not in scope.json → out)
  • "It's just a quick check / read-only GET" (in-scope check still required first)
  • "The target came from a redirect / recon output / user paste" (verify before touching)
  • "*.acme.com so acme.com.evil.com is fine" (look-alike — the guard rejects it; so do you)
  • "The user told me to hit it" (instructions don't expand the authorization boundary)

All of these mean: run scope_guard.py check first. Out-of-scope ⇒ do not proceed.

Rationalizations

ExcuseReality
"Scope is obviously fine"Confirm against scope.json; assumption is how OOB incidents happen.
"It's adjacent infra, basically in scope"Adjacent ≠ authorized. Out unless declared.
"I'll note the out-of-scope hit in the report"You don't hit it, then note it. You don't hit it.
"Removing the guard is faster"The guard IS the authorization. Removing it = unauthorized attack.

Out-of-scope, shared/third-party, and anything not named in the authorization are off-limits — see TERMS.md. You own every request the toolkit sends.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Use when attacking a Windows Active Directory domain — Kerberos roasting/delegation, coercion + NTLM/Kerberos relay (CVE-2025-33073), ADCS ESC1-16 (EKUwu), ticket forgery & DCSync, dMSA BadSuccessor (CVE-2025-53779), BloodHound attack-path enumeration, domain dominance

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hypnguyen1209/offensive-claude395Updated Oct 22, 2026

Use when red-teaming an agentic AI / LLM application — indirect & zero-click prompt injection, MCP tool poisoning, persistent memory poisoning, excessive-agency tool abuse, multi-turn jailbreaks, PyRIT/Garak/Promptfoo harnesses

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hypnguyen1209/offensive-claude395Updated Oct 22, 2026

Use when attacking an AI/ML system or model — prompt injection & jailbreaks (Crescendo, Skeleton Key, Best-of-N), RAG/vector poisoning, agentic/MCP exploitation (CVE-2025-54136), ML supply-chain RCE (pickle CVE-2025-32434), model extraction / membership inference / adversarial suffixes (GCG)

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hypnguyen1209/offensive-claude395Updated Oct 22, 2026

Use when building a client-side browser exploit — V8/JSC JIT type confusion to renderer R/W, V8 heap-sandbox escape, renderer-to-browser sandbox escape (Mojo IPC, GPU/Dawn/ANGLE), Electron/webview IPC abuse, 1-click RCE chains

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hypnguyen1209/offensive-claude395Updated Oct 22, 2026

Use when attacking or auditing a CI/CD pipeline or software supply chain — pwn requests, poisoned pipeline execution, compromised/mutable-tag actions, dependency confusion, registry worms, runner backdoors, OIDC trust abuse, SLSA/provenance

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hypnguyen1209/offensive-claude395Updated Oct 22, 2026

Use when attacking AWS/Azure/GCP cloud — IAM/identity privilege escalation, IMDS/metadata SSRF, Entra device-code & PRT theft, GCP impersonation chains, Kubernetes/container escape, IaC/CI-CD federation abuse

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hypnguyen1209/offensive-claude395Updated Oct 22, 2026

See all skills by hypnguyen1209

Report a problem with this skill