Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

analyzing-sbom-for-supply-chain-vulnerabilities

Analyze a software bill of materials, an inventory of software components, against known vulnerability records. Trace indirect dependencies, assess risk, and produce reports that help teams prioritize fixes and review supplier software.

OriginalShow the original description

Parses Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) in CycloneDX and SPDX JSON formats to identify supply chain vulnerabilities by correlating components against the NVD CVE database via the NVD 2.0 API. Builds dependency graphs, calculates risk scores, identifies transitive vulnerability paths, and generates compliance reports. Activates for requests involving SBOM analysis, software composition analysis, supply chain security assessment, dependency vulnerability scanning, CycloneDX/SPDX parsing, or CVE correlation.

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Assessing vulnerabilities in vendor-provided software inventories
  • Checking whether a newly disclosed CVE affects deployed software
  • Adding SBOM vulnerability checks to CI/CD
  • Preparing supply chain risk reports for procurement

Files included (4)

  • SKILL.md11.4 KB
  • LICENSE11.0 KB
  • references/api-reference.md5.9 KB
  • scripts/agent.py27.7 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Analyzing SBOM for Supply Chain Vulnerabilities

When to Use

  • A new regulatory requirement (EO 14028, EU CRA) mandates SBOM analysis for software deliveries
  • Security team needs to assess third-party risk by scanning vendor-provided SBOMs
  • CI/CD pipeline requires automated vulnerability checks against generated SBOMs
  • Incident response needs to determine if a newly disclosed CVE affects deployed software
  • Procurement team requires supply chain risk assessment for a software acquisition

Do not use for runtime vulnerability scanning of live systems; use container scanning tools (Trivy, Grype CLI) or host-based vulnerability scanners (Nessus, Qualys) instead.

Prerequisites

Workflow

Step 1: Generate SBOM (if not provided)

Use syft to create an SBOM from a container image or project directory:

# Generate CycloneDX JSON from a container image
syft alpine:latest -o cyclonedx-json > sbom-cyclonedx.json

# Generate SPDX JSON from a project directory
syft dir:/path/to/project -o spdx-json > sbom-spdx.json

# Generate from a running container
syft docker:my-app-container -o cyclonedx-json > sbom.json

Syft supports over 30 package ecosystems including npm, PyPI, Maven, Go modules, apt, apk, and RPM. The generated SBOM includes package names, versions, licenses, CPE identifiers, and PURL (Package URL) references.

Step 2: Parse SBOM and Extract Components

Parse the SBOM to extract all software components with their identifiers:

CycloneDX JSON Structure:

{
  "bomFormat": "CycloneDX",
  "specVersion": "1.5",
  "components": [
    {
      "type": "library",
      "name": "lodash",
      "version": "4.17.20",
      "purl": "pkg:npm/lodash@4.17.20",
      "cpe": "cpe:2.3:a:lodash:lodash:4.17.20:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
      "licenses": [{"license": {"id": "MIT"}}]
    }
  ],
  "dependencies": [
    {"ref": "pkg:npm/express@4.18.2", "dependsOn": ["pkg:npm/lodash@4.17.20"]}
  ]
}

SPDX JSON Structure:

{
  "spdxVersion": "SPDX-2.3",
  "packages": [
    {
      "name": "lodash",
      "versionInfo": "4.17.20",
      "externalRefs": [
        {"referenceType": "purl", "referenceLocator": "pkg:npm/lodash@4.17.20"},
        {"referenceType": "cpe23Type", "referenceLocator": "cpe:2.3:a:lodash:lodash:4.17.20:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"}
      ],
      "licenseConcluded": "MIT"
    }
  ],
  "relationships": [
    {"spdxElementId": "SPDXRef-express", "relatedSpdxElement": "SPDXRef-lodash",
     "relationshipType": "DEPENDS_ON"}
  ]
}

Step 3: Correlate Components with NVD CVE Database

Query the NVD 2.0 API to find known vulnerabilities for each component:

import requests

NVD_API = "https://services.nvd.nist.gov/rest/json/cves/2.0"

def search_cves_by_cpe(cpe_name, api_key=None):
    params = {"cpeName": cpe_name, "resultsPerPage": 50}
    headers = {"apiKey": api_key} if api_key else {}
    resp = requests.get(NVD_API, params=params, headers=headers, timeout=30)
    resp.raise_for_status()
    return resp.json().get("vulnerabilities", [])

def search_cves_by_keyword(keyword, version=None, api_key=None):
    params = {"keywordSearch": keyword, "resultsPerPage": 50}
    headers = {"apiKey": api_key} if api_key else {}
    resp = requests.get(NVD_API, params=params, headers=headers, timeout=30)
    resp.raise_for_status()
    return resp.json().get("vulnerabilities", [])

The NVD API supports searching by CPE name (most precise), keyword, CVE ID, and date ranges. Rate limits: 5 requests/30 seconds without API key, 50 requests/30 seconds with key.

Step 4: Build Dependency Graph and Identify Transitive Risks

Construct a directed graph of dependencies to trace vulnerability propagation:

import networkx as nx

def build_dependency_graph(sbom):
    G = nx.DiGraph()
    # Add nodes for each component
    for comp in sbom["components"]:
        G.add_node(comp["purl"], name=comp["name"], version=comp["version"])
    # Add edges from dependency relationships
    for dep in sbom.get("dependencies", []):
        for child in dep.get("dependsOn", []):
            G.add_edge(dep["ref"], child)
    return G

Transitive dependency analysis identifies components that are not directly included but are pulled in through dependency chains. A vulnerability in a deeply nested transitive dependency (e.g., 4 levels deep) still represents risk but may be harder to remediate.

Key graph metrics for risk assessment:

  • In-degree: How many components depend on this one (high in-degree = high blast radius)
  • Shortest path to root: Distance from application entry point (closer = more exploitable)
  • Betweenness centrality: Components that sit on many dependency paths (bottleneck risk)

Step 5: Calculate Risk Scores

Aggregate vulnerability data into component and overall risk scores:

Risk Score Calculation:
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Component Risk = max(CVSS scores of all CVEs affecting the component)

Weighted Risk = Component Risk * Dependency Factor
  where Dependency Factor = 1.0 + (0.1 * in_degree)
  (more dependents = higher organizational impact)

Overall SBOM Risk = weighted average of all component risks
  weighted by dependency centrality

Risk Levels:
  CRITICAL: CVSS >= 9.0 or known exploited (CISA KEV)
  HIGH:     CVSS >= 7.0
  MEDIUM:   CVSS >= 4.0
  LOW:      CVSS < 4.0

Step 6: Cross-Validate with Grype

Use grype to independently scan the SBOM and compare findings:

# Scan CycloneDX SBOM with grype
grype sbom:sbom-cyclonedx.json -o json > grype-results.json

# Scan SPDX SBOM
grype sbom:sbom-spdx.json -o table

# Filter by severity
grype sbom:sbom-cyclonedx.json --only-fixed --fail-on critical

Grype pulls vulnerability data from NVD, GitHub Security Advisories, Alpine SecDB, Red Hat, Debian, Ubuntu, Amazon Linux, and Oracle security databases, providing broader coverage than NVD alone.

Step 7: Generate Compliance Report

Produce a structured report suitable for regulatory compliance:

SBOM VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS REPORT
====================================
SBOM File:         app-sbom-cyclonedx.json
Format:            CycloneDX v1.5
Analysis Date:     2026-03-19
Total Components:  247
Total Dependencies: 1,842 (direct: 34, transitive: 213)

VULNERABILITY SUMMARY
  Critical:  3 components / 5 CVEs
  High:      11 components / 18 CVEs
  Medium:    27 components / 41 CVEs
  Low:       8 components / 12 CVEs

CRITICAL FINDINGS
1. lodash@4.17.20
   CVE-2021-23337 (CVSS 7.2) - Command Injection via template
   CVE-2020-28500 (CVSS 5.3) - ReDoS in trimEnd
   Dependents: 14 components (high blast radius)
   Fix: Upgrade to 4.17.21+

2. log4j-core@2.14.1
   CVE-2021-44228 (CVSS 10.0) - Log4Shell RCE [CISA KEV]
   CVE-2021-45046 (CVSS 9.0) - Incomplete fix bypass
   Dependents: 8 components
   Fix: Upgrade to 2.17.1+

DEPENDENCY GRAPH RISKS
  Most depended-on: core-util@1.2.3 (47 dependents)
  Deepest chain: app -> framework -> adapter -> codec -> zlib (5 levels)
  Bottleneck components: 3 components on >50% of dependency paths

LICENSE COMPLIANCE
  Copyleft licenses found: 2 (GPL-3.0 in libxml2, AGPL-3.0 in mongodb-driver)
  Review required for commercial distribution

Key Concepts

TermDefinition
SBOMSoftware Bill of Materials; a formal inventory of all components, libraries, and dependencies in a software product
CycloneDXOWASP-maintained SBOM standard supporting JSON, XML, and protobuf formats with dependency graph and vulnerability data
SPDXLinux Foundation SBOM standard focused on license compliance with support for package, file, and snippet-level detail
PURLPackage URL; a standardized scheme for identifying software packages across ecosystems (e.g., pkg:npm/lodash@4.17.21)
CPECommon Platform Enumeration; NIST naming scheme for IT products used to correlate with NVD CVE data
NVDNational Vulnerability Database; US government repository of vulnerability data indexed by CVE identifiers
Transitive DependencyA dependency not directly declared but pulled in through the dependency chain of direct dependencies
CISA KEVCISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog; CVEs confirmed to be actively exploited in the wild

Tools & Systems

  • syft (Anchore): Open-source SBOM generator supporting 30+ package ecosystems and CycloneDX/SPDX output
  • grype (Anchore): Vulnerability scanner that accepts SBOMs as input and correlates against multiple advisory databases
  • cyclonedx-python-lib: Python library for creating, parsing, and validating CycloneDX SBOMs programmatically
  • lib4sbom: Python library for parsing both SPDX and CycloneDX format SBOMs
  • nvdlib: Python wrapper for the NVD 2.0 API supporting CVE and CPE queries with rate limit management
  • OWASP Dependency-Track: Platform for continuous SBOM analysis, vulnerability tracking, and policy enforcement

Common Scenarios

Scenario: Assessing Vendor Software After Log4Shell Disclosure

Context: After the Log4Shell (CVE-2021-44228) disclosure, the security team needs to determine which vendor-supplied applications contain vulnerable versions of log4j. Several vendors have provided SBOMs per contractual requirements.

Approach:

  1. Collect all vendor SBOMs (CycloneDX or SPDX JSON format)
  2. Parse each SBOM and search for log4j-core components with versions < 2.17.1
  3. Query NVD API for the specific CVEs (CVE-2021-44228, CVE-2021-45046, CVE-2021-45105)
  4. Build dependency graphs to identify which application components depend on log4j
  5. Calculate blast radius: how many services and endpoints are exposed
  6. Generate prioritized remediation report sorted by exposure and business criticality
  7. Cross-validate findings with grype scan of the same SBOMs

Pitfalls:

  • Vendor SBOMs may be incomplete, missing shaded/bundled JAR files that embed log4j
  • SPDX and CycloneDX version differences may affect parser compatibility
  • NVD API rate limits can slow analysis when scanning hundreds of components without an API key
  • CPE names in SBOMs may not exactly match NVD entries, requiring fuzzy matching
  • Transitive dependencies may include log4j even when it is not a direct dependency

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

Assess exposure of Windows secrets protected by DPAPI, the operating system’s data protection service, during authorized security tests. Guide examination and decryption of saved credentials and browser data using available user sessions, credentials, or backup keys.

  • Assessing saved credential exposure in authorized tests
  • Examining collected DPAPI files offline
  • Reviewing protected browser and RDP credentials
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills34.9KUpdated Aug 31, 2026

Assess Shadow Credentials account takeover during authorized Active Directory testing. Examine permissions that allow public key registration, validate authentication without a password reset, and document credential cleanup, detection opportunities, and access control changes needed for remediation.

  • Assessing risky permissions identified in BloodHound
  • Validating account takeover without resetting a password
  • Generating directory change records during security exercises
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills34.9KUpdated Aug 31, 2026

Prepare for CMMC Level 2, a cybersecurity certification for defense contractors. Define the systems handling controlled information, review security requirements, calculate the SPRS assessment score, and organize remediation plans and evidence into a readiness report.

  • Define the assessment scope for systems handling controlled information
  • Calculate an SPRS score and prioritize unmet security requirements
  • Prepare security plans, remediation milestones, and assessment evidence
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills34.9KUpdated Aug 31, 2026

Create disk images for investigations using dd or dcfldd on Linux. The workflow covers write protection, bit-for-bit copying, hash checks to verify integrity, and documentation of the acquisition process.

  • Preserving a suspect drive before investigation
  • Creating evidence copies of USB devices or memory cards
  • Verifying that a disk image matches its source
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills34.9KUpdated Aug 31, 2026

Review Active Directory permissions with ldap3, a Python library for directory queries. Identify excessive access granted to non-administrative accounts, explain potential privilege escalation paths, and produce a JSON report with affected objects and remediation recommendations.

  • Auditing excessive Active Directory permissions
  • Investigating privilege escalation paths from ordinary accounts
  • Reporting affected objects and permission remediation recommendations
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills34.9KUpdated Aug 31, 2026

Inspect suspicious Android APK files without running them. Analyze permissions, app components, suspicious code patterns, and network indicators, then produce a JSON risk report to support malware triage and detection rule development.

  • Triage suspicious APK files without running them
  • Inspect dangerous permission combinations and suspicious API calls
  • Extract network indicators for malware detection rules
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills34.9KUpdated Aug 31, 2026

See all skills by mukul975

Report a problem with this skill