「code analysis」の検索結果

Systematically deobfuscate multi-layer PowerShell malware using AST analysis, dynamic tracing, and tools like PSDecode and PowerDecode to reveal hidden payloads and C2 infrastructure.

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。

End-to-end observational epidemiology analysis — from research question (PECO Population/Exposure/Comparator/Outcome) to publication-ready statistical report. Covers cohort/case-control/cross-sectional design, regression with confounders, propensity scoring, sensitivity analysis. Writes Python code for every step. Use for epidemiology study analysis, NHANES/UK-Biobank-style analyses.

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。

Systematic performance profiling and optimization methodology. Covers CPU profiling, memory profiling, heap analysis, goroutine/thread analysis, FlameGraph generation, latency profiling, database query profiling, network I/O profiling, and continuous performance regression detection. USE WHEN: investigating performance issues, optimizing slow code, reducing memory usage, diagnosing GC/CPU bottlenecks, finding N+1 queries, analyzing pprof/flamegraph output, or establishing a performance baseline. Triggers on "profiling", "performance analysis", "slow code", "flame graph", "pprof", "heap dump", "memory leak", "CPU spike", "bottleneck".

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 two-pass, multidisciplinary code audit led by a tie-breaker lead, combining security, performance, UX, DX, and edge-case analysis into one prioritized report with concrete fixes. Use when the user asks to audit code, perform a deep review, stress-test a codebase, or produce a risk-ranked remediation plan across backend, frontend, APIs, infra scripts, and product flows.

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 codebases w/ pygount: LOC, languages, ratios.

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。

Expert reverse engineer specializing in binary analysis, disassembly, decompilation, and software analysis. Masters IDA Pro, Ghidra, radare2, x64dbg, and modern RE toolchains. Handles executable analysis, library inspection, protocol extraction, and vulnerability research. Use PROACTIVELY for binary analysis, CTF challenges, security research, or understanding undocumented software.

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 QR code phishing (quishing) attacks that bypass traditional email security by embedding malicious URLs in QR code images within emails.

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 deobfuscate multi-layer PowerShell malware using AST analysis, dynamic tracing, and tools like PSDecode and PowerDecode to reveal hidden payloads and C2 infrastructure.

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。

Autonomous AI code generation safety guardrail register: static AST analysis, forbidden import filters, and zero-day vulnerability 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。

Technology-agnostic prompt generator that creates customizable AI prompts for scanning codebases and identifying high-quality code exemplars. Supports multiple programming languages (.NET, Java, JavaScript, TypeScript, React, Angular, Python) with configurable analysis depth, categorization methods, and documentation formats to establish coding standards and maintain consistency across development teams.

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。

Detects and prevents code injection attacks targeting serverless functions (AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, Google Cloud Functions) through event source poisoning, malicious layer injection, runtime command execution, and IAM privilege escalation via function modification. The analyst combines static analysis of function code, CloudTrail event correlation, runtime behavior monitoring, and IAM policy auditing to identify injection vectors across the expanded serverless attack surface including API Gateway, S3, SQS, DynamoDB Streams, and CloudWatch event triggers. Activates for requests involving Lambda security assessment, serverless injection detection, function event poisoning analysis, or serverless privilege escalation investigation.

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。

Perform static analysis of Android APK malware using apktool for resource decompilation, jadx for Java source recovery, and androguard for manifest inspection, dangerous permission-combination detection, and identification of obfuscated code, dynamic code loading, and reflection-based API calls. Use to statically triage a suspicious APK without executing it or to build mobile malware detection rules.

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。

Perform static analysis of malicious PDF documents using peepdf, pdfid, and pdf-parser to extract embedded JavaScript, shellcode, and suspicious objects. Use when triaging a suspicious PDF attachment from a phishing email, analyzing a PDF-based exploit document, or building detection signatures for weaponized PDF threats.

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。

Fullstack development toolkit with project scaffolding for Next.js, FastAPI, MERN, and Django stacks, code quality analysis with security and complexity scoring, and stack selection guidance. Use when the user asks to "scaffold a new project", "create a Next.js app", "set up FastAPI with React", "analyze code quality", "audit my codebase", "what stack should I use", "generate project boilerplate", or mentions fullstack development, project setup, or tech stack comparison.

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。

Analyze git repositories to build a security ownership topology (people-to-file), compute bus factor and sensitive-code ownership, and export CSV/JSON for graph databases and visualization. Trigger only when the user explicitly wants a security-oriented ownership or bus-factor analysis grounded in git history (for example: orphaned sensitive code, security maintainers, CODEOWNERS reality checks for risk, sensitive hotspots, or ownership clusters). Do not trigger for general maintainer lists or non-security ownership questions.

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。

Implement, fix, refactor, or remove repository code under required scope, non-regression, verification, and review gates. Use whenever a task may change a production, test, script, or other implementation artifact, including build logic, generated source, and behavior-affecting configuration. Also use it alongside a specialized code-changing Skill. Do not use for read-only analysis or review, diagnosis-only work, or prose-only changes.

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。

Drive Anthropic's Claude Code CLI (`claude -p`) as a non-interactive coding sub-agent from inside Codex. Use when you want to delegate a coding/analysis/refactor task to Claude, get a second opinion / adversarial review from another model, hand off long-context planning, or fan out parallel agents. Covers the exact `claude -p` flags, permission modes, output capture, JSON/stream-json modes, session resume, parallel fan-out, and the mandatory "delegate → capture → independently verify, never trust the self-report" supervision loop.

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 code, repository, and data/SQL work to isolated Kortix sessions instead of burning your main context on it. Use when asked to implement a feature, fix a bug, make failing tests pass, work a ticket/issue, refactor, navigate or change a codebase, ship a PR, review a pull request, or run SQL/warehouse analysis against a dataset — and when the user wants two agents or parallel reviewers/investigators on the same work. Covers the explore-vs-session routing call, deciding where the code lives (this project's repo vs cloning an external GitHub repo) or where the data lives, finding the repo with gh, spawning sessions in parallel, dual PR reviews, and reporting results back. Triggers: 'implement', 'fix the bug', 'make the tests pass', 'work this ticket', 'refactor this', 'open a PR', 'review this PR', 'run two agents on it', 'query the warehouse', 'analyze this dataset'.

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。

Codex-only writing and layout overlay for AI Berkshire investment research reports. Use whenever Codex creates, rewrites, revises, or critiques company/industry/fund research reports, especially long-form Markdown reports that need financial rigor, readable business mechanics, contrarian analysis, valuation-to-action guidance, investor-specific recommendations, restrained typography, and clear buy/hold/sell signals. Do not use this to modify Claude Code slash-command sources.

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 Codex is already in the attack-path-analysis phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to trace a security finding from source to sink and calibrate severity. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.

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。

Analyze existing source code to identify key patterns and generate comprehensive educational skill documentation with proper YAML frontmatter, architectural analysis, code templates, and usage examples.

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。

Builds and queries multi-language source and binary code graphs for security analysis. Includes pre-analysis passes for blast radius, taint propagation, privilege boundaries, entry point enumeration, proxy/unresolved-call tracking, type/reference queries, structural traversal, graph diffs, audit augmentation, declared cross-language/FFI/external links via `.trailmark/links.toml`, and SQL schema graphs. Use when analyzing call paths, mapping attack surface, finding complexity hotspots, enumerating entry points, tracing taint propagation, measuring blast radius, importing SARIF/weAudit/binary findings, linking source graphs across language or RPC boundaries, or building a code graph for audit prioritization. Feature-gate version-specific Trailmark APIs before using them; prefer `trailmark.parse.detect_languages()` or `--language auto` when the target language is unknown or polyglot.

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。

Selects bounded, graph-informed source slices with Trailmark and delegates focused code analysis or patch-proposal work to a smaller subagent. Use when offloading function-, class-, caller-, callee-, call-path-, entrypoint-, or line-focused code tasks to constrained or locally hosted models without exposing the full repository.

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。

Develop evidence-backed structural and architectural security hardening proposals from vulnerability disclosures, supplied findings, incident or assessment documents, source code, or a completed Codex Security scan. Use when a user asks for systemic improvements, alternatives beyond per-finding patches, before-and-after security architecture views, engineering tradeoff analysis, or an implementation-ready plan for a selected hardening option. Also use automatically after a Codex Security scan with reportable findings when the top-level scan workflow requests final-report hardening guidance.

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。