「mitm」の検索結果

Orchestrates the end-to-end germline short-variant pipeline from FASTQ to a filtered, normalized, benchmarked VCF, chaining QC/trim, BWA-MEM2 alignment, duplicate marking, optional BQSR, calling (bcftools/GATK HaplotypeCaller/DeepVariant/DRAGEN), normalization, site+genotype filtering, annotation, and hap.py/vcfeval benchmarking. Use when deciding the pipeline-wide reference-genome commitment (GRCh38 analysis set vs T2T, ALT/decoy handling), sequencing the steps in the defensible order (normalize BEFORE annotate, filter site- then genotype-level), choosing the calling engine and single-sample vs cohort joint-calling, picking a filtering strategy by cohort size, or benchmarking stratified within GIAB confident regions. Hands off mechanism to the variant-calling and read-alignment component skills; not a re-teach of any single step.

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。

Route agent work through AccInt's MCP memory loop: retrieve prior outcomes, resolve frames, and close commitments with evidence.

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 a pre-mortem — imagine the project has already failed one year from now and work backward to find the root causes before they happen. Load when the user asks for a pre-mortem, wants to imagine failure before committing, asks "what could go wrong before we start", "assume this fails — why", "risk analysis before launch", "what kills this project", "what could go wrong", or when deep-thinking diagnoses a pre-mortem frame. Based on Gary Klein's prospective hindsight method, which surfaces failure causes more effectively than forward risk analysis. Most useful right before a major commitment.

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。

Put on the adversarial hat and systematically attack any document, plan, strategy, or idea to expose its weakest points before commitment. Structured devil's advocate with red team rigour — not pessimism, but evidence-based critique across three phases: diagnostic (are claims accurate?), creative (is the problem artificially constrained?), challenge (are solutions robust?). Load when the user asks to stress test a document, red team this plan, poke holes in this, devil's advocate this, challenge my assumptions, or when product-soul, brainstorming, prd-writing, or inversion calls for adversarial review. Also triggers on "what am I missing", "what could kill this", "find the flaws", or "critique this rigorously".

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。

Pre-commitment attack on a plan by an agent that did not write it. Use when presenting a feature-deep-dive plan, assigning vision-to-fleet briefs, moving a register to build mode, ratifying a scope list, or coding a new contract or table. NOT for built work or DONE reports (use subagent-dispatch).

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。

[51] EXECUTE. Commitment to maximum quality work with 150% coverage. Use when you need the highest quality output for critical tasks, complex problems, important decisions, or when standard work isn't enough. Triggers on "maximum quality", "150% mode", "full quality", "critical task", or when you explicitly want AI to work at its best.

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。

Maxim cinematic brand film — engineered for commitment and emotional brand alignment. Uses Hero's Journey + Peak-End Rule + Emotional Arc Theory to convert viewers into brand advocates. Use for brand films, anthem ads, founder stories, long-form brand content. Triggers on cinematic, film, brand film, anthem, dramatic, epic, Hollywood-style.

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。

Detect and prevent ARP spoofing attacks using ARPWatch, Dynamic ARP Inspection, Wireshark analysis, and custom monitoring scripts to protect against man-in-the-middle interception.

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。

Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) attack methodology — GATT enumeration, characteristic read/write without auth, pairing downgrade (Just Works forced), LE Secure Connections bypass, MITM via active relay, sniffing with Sniffle (TI CC1352) / Ubertooth / Frontline, encryption key extraction (LE Legacy Pairing crackable, LE Secure Connections strong), proximity authentication abuse (cars, locks), and companion-app trust analysis. Use for IoT BLE devices, smart locks, fitness trackers, medical devices, BLE beacons, or any device pairing over BLE.

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。

Evil Twin / KARMA / Mana access point methodology — rogue AP construction with hostapd-mana / wifiphisher / airgeddon, KARMA universal probe response, Mana selective probe response, captive portal phishing, deauth-driven client coercion to attacker AP, MAC randomization defeat via PNL leak analysis, post-association MITM (DNS, ARP, transparent proxy), credential capture for portal/web/SMB, and detection-evasion tactics. Use to coerce client devices onto an attacker-controlled AP, intercept their traffic, harvest credentials, or deliver payloads via captive portal.

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 API security testing methodology covering REST, gRPC, and WebSocket attack surfaces. Addresses the full OWASP API Security Top 10 2023 including BOLA/IDOR, broken authentication, excessive data exposure, rate limiting bypass, BFLA, mass assignment, SSRF, and security misconfiguration. Includes REST-specific attacks such as HTTP verb tampering, content-type switching, and parameter pollution. Covers gRPC exploitation through protobuf interception, reflection API enumeration, and metadata injection. Addresses WebSocket vulnerabilities including origin bypass, message injection, and cross-site WebSocket hijacking. Provides tooling guidance for Burp Suite, Postman, grpcurl, websocat, and mitmproxy. Each technique includes detection signatures and defensive indicators so you understand what artifacts your testing leaves behind. Designed for authorized penetration testing engagements against API-driven architectures.

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。

Hunt TLS/SSL and DNS misconfigurations — missing HSTS (downgrade attack), weak cipher suites, expired/invalid certificates, mTLS bypass, missing SPF/DKIM/DMARC (email spoofing), DNS Zone Transfer (AXFR), dangling CNAME subdomain takeover, CAA records. Most of these are Info/Low on their own — this skill is opinionated about which findings actually pay (spoofable DMARC with delivered-to-inbox proof, AXFR returning internal hosts, dangling-CNAME takeover) versus which get rejected as best-practice noise (missing CAA, missing HSTS with no MitM position). Use during recon to find infrastructure weaknesses, and to TRIAGE them honestly before reporting.

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。

Defensive counterpart to federated-harbor-redteam: closes the smells that red team opens against The Federated Harbor whitepaper. Federation-specific defenses for cross-harbor primitives — mechanization commitments, scope hedges, cross-paper dependency formalization, pre-emptive analogies (CT, Macaroons, atomic swaps), and defense-in-depth framing (refuses vs prices). Use during a versioned red-vs-white round; pairs with federated-harbor-redteam. NOT for ad-hoc code review, NOT for the Anchor or Bonded papers (use whitehat-defense).

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。

Apply GPGP/TAEMS coordination as local-scheduler constraints under explicit task, view, commitment, and delivery assumptions. NOT for assuming global task visibility, reliable delivery, or modern execution authority.

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 an agent's handling of obligations, prohibitions, permissions, and conflicts among norms and goals. Use when an autonomous agent must decide which norms apply and what to do when they conflict. NOT for simple fixed policy checks, ordinary BDI commitment design, or organizational metaphor.

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 an individual agent's belief, goal, intention, and reconsideration model. Use when specifying autonomous decision state, commitment policy, or recovery from failed plans. NOT for AgentSpeak interpreter mechanics, organization modeling, normative conflicts, or multi-agent execution waves.

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 and audit a pricing function for variable-cost agent labor. Choose among per-seat, metered, credits, hybrid, and outcome pricing; name buyer value and cost metrics separately; calculate a reproducible cost floor; require pre-commitment guardrails; and stress-test declared personas. Use for offline pricing-design evidence, not billing implementation or runtime control. NOT for production billing, payment collection, or runtime spend enforcement.

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。