「check」の検索結果

Performs graph-assisted triage of a single security finding, SARIF result, weAudit annotation, suspicious function, or report excerpt using Trailmark reachability, entrypoint paths, taint, privilege-boundary, blast-radius, caller/callee, and neighborhood evidence. Use when deciding whether one candidate issue is reachable, prioritizing a finding before PoC work, preparing evidence for exploit validation, or checking whether a static-analysis result is actionable.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Validates cryptographic implementations against Project Wycheproof's test vectors, which encode known attacks and edge cases across AES, RSA, ECDSA, ECDH, and more. Covers loading test vectors, mapping result flags onto pass and fail expectations, and reading a failure. Use when testing a crypto implementation against known attacks, checking a library against standard test vectors, or investigating why two implementations disagree on the same input.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "open source this project", "prepare this repository for public release", "make this repo public", "check open-source readiness", "choose a license for this project", or "set up release automation" ahead of a public launch. Provides a release-readiness workflow covering secrets hygiene, licensing, documentation, CI, and language-specific packaging.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Scans TON (The Open Network) smart contracts for 3 critical vulnerabilities including integer-as-boolean misuse, fake Jetton contracts, and forward TON without gas checks. Use when auditing FunC contracts.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Smart contract development advisor based on Trail of Bits' best practices. Analyzes codebase to generate documentation/specifications, review architecture, check upgradeability patterns, assess implementation quality, identify pitfalls, review dependencies, and evaluate testing. Use when asking whether a smart contract project follows development best practices, reviewing on-chain/off-chain split, upgradeability, or delegatecall proxy patterns against guidelines, or seeking recommendations on contract design, inheritance, events, documentation, dependencies, or test strategy.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Scans Substrate/Polkadot pallets for 7 critical vulnerabilities including arithmetic overflow, panic DoS, incorrect weights, and bad origin checks. Use when auditing Substrate runtimes or FRAME pallets.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Systematically verifies suspected security bugs to eliminate false positives, producing a TRUE POSITIVE or FALSE POSITIVE verdict with documented evidence for each. Use when asked whether a specific finding is real, exploitable, or a false positive, or to verify or validate a suspected vulnerability — not for hunting or discovering new bugs.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Prepares codebases for security review using Trail of Bits' checklist. Helps set review goals, runs static analysis tools, increases test coverage, removes dead code, ensures accessibility, and generates documentation (flowcharts, user stories, inline comments). Use when preparing your own codebase to be audited by someone else, getting a repository review-ready before an external security review, deciding what to fix before auditors start, or asking what assessors need from a project. For understanding unfamiliar code you are about to audit, use audit-context-building instead.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Scans Algorand smart contracts for 11 common vulnerabilities including rekeying attacks, unchecked transaction fees, missing field validations, and access control issues. Use when auditing Algorand projects (TEAL/PyTeal).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Scans Solana programs for 6 critical vulnerabilities including arbitrary CPI, improper PDA validation, missing signer/ownership checks, and sysvar spoofing. Use when auditing Solana/Anchor programs.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Check code against the documentation that specifies it - which requirements hold, which the code contradicts, which are absent, and what the code does that no document mentions. Use when comparing an implementation against a whitepaper, protocol spec, or design document.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Business logic vulnerability testing for web/mobile/API engagements. Covers workflow bypass, state machine violations, multi-step process abuse, price/quantity/discount manipulation, currency confusion, coupon stacking, refund/chargeback abuse, race conditions on logic boundaries, parameter tampering for hidden flows, role/tenant boundary violations, time-of-check vs use, anti-automation defeat, fraud-detection evasion, and subscription/quota abuse. Use when scoping an application after surface-level OWASP Top 10 has been covered, or when the asset is a transactional/marketplace/fintech/e-commerce/SaaS app where logic flaws produce direct financial impact.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Comprehensive offensive methodology for software supply chain attacks covering the full kill chain from reconnaissance through exploitation. Addresses dependency confusion across npm, PyPI, and NuGet ecosystems where internal registry override allows an attacker to inject malicious packages that shadow private dependencies. Covers typosquatting techniques for popular packages, compromised package injection via maintainer account takeover or social engineering, and build system attacks through Makefile injection, setup.py install hooks, and npm postinstall scripts. Extends into CI/CD artifact tampering where build outputs are replaced or modified in transit, code signing abuse through stolen or self-signed certificates, upstream repository compromise via commit injection or force-push to trusted repos, and container image supply chain attacks including base image trojaning and registry confusion. Maps to MITRE ATT&CK T1195.001 (Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools) and T1195.002 (Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain). Integrates tooling such as confused for dependency confusion scanning and dependency-check for known vulnerable component detection. Each technique section provides reproducible proof-of-concept patterns, detection guidance for defenders, and engagement-safe execution notes for authorized red team operations.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Improve academic paper writing quality for ML/CV/NLP-style papers with clear section structure, paragraph flow, and reviewer-facing presentation. Use when drafting or revising Abstract, Introduction, Related Work, Method, Experiments, or Conclusion; polishing figures/tables; checking claim-support alignment; or performing self-review before submission.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit or critique a product flow, journey, workflow, funnel, onboarding path, checkout path, settings path, screen, or multi-step product experience by capturing screenshots first, then reporting UX, design, and accessibility findings inline from that evidence. Use Figma only when the user explicitly asks for a board. Use when the user asks to audit, review, critique, inspect, assess, analyze, evaluate, or give feedback on a product experience.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when Product Design is explicitly invoked, or when the user's main goal is to explore a design, research UX, audit or critique a flow, faithfully clone a visual source, check a built design, or share a prototype. Do not use Product Design for ordinary implementation unless the user explicitly asks for it.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Design custom metric packs for plugin-eval so teams can add local evaluation rubrics that emit schema-compatible checks and metrics. Use when the user wants their own evaluation criteria or visualizations.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Inspect a ChatGPT Apps MCP server codebase and generate chatgpt-app-submission.json with app info suggestions, tool hint justifications, test cases, and negative test cases, then report review-check findings and outputSchema warnings for submission review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Start or patch Dynamo router modes and run router endpoint smoke checks. Use for round-robin, KV-aware, least-loaded, or device-aware routing setup; use recipe-runner for recipe deployment and troubleshoot for failure diagnosis.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Run or plan tumor-normal, tumor-only, WGS, WES, or cancer-panel somatic variant workflows with pairing, contamination, panel-of-normals, purity, QC, and annotation checks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Check whether public NGS tools and packages already exist before downloading, installing, or running a sequencing pipeline.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Run or plan bulk RNA-seq differential-expression analysis from count matrices with replicate, design formula, contrast, batch, normalization, QC plot, and result-table checks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Run or plan bulk RNA-seq FASTQ-to-count processing with sample-sheet, strandedness, genome annotation, alignment or pseudoalignment, MultiQC, and count-matrix QC checks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Run or plan deep germline WGS, WES, targeted-panel, cohort, or trio variant-calling workflows with reference-build, known-sites, QC, joint-calling, and annotation checks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。