owasp-security▌
agamm/claude-code-owasp · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Apply these security standards when writing or reviewing code.
OWASP Security Best Practices Skill
Apply these security standards when writing or reviewing code.
Quick Reference: OWASP Top 10:2025
| # | Vulnerability | Key Prevention |
|---|---|---|
| A01 | Broken Access Control | Deny by default, enforce server-side, verify ownership |
| A02 | Security Misconfiguration | Harden configs, disable defaults, minimize features |
| A03 | Supply Chain Failures | Lock versions, verify integrity, audit dependencies |
| A04 | Cryptographic Failures | TLS 1.2+, AES-256-GCM, Argon2/bcrypt for passwords |
| A05 | Injection | Parameterized queries, input validation, safe APIs |
| A06 | Insecure Design | Threat model, rate limit, design security controls |
| A07 | Auth Failures | MFA, check breached passwords, secure sessions |
| A08 | Integrity Failures | Sign packages, SRI for CDN, safe serialization |
| A09 | Logging Failures | Log security events, structured format, alerting |
| A10 | Exception Handling | Fail-closed, hide internals, log with context |
Security Code Review Checklist
When reviewing code, check for these issues:
Input Handling
- All user input validated server-side
- Using parameterized queries (not string concatenation)
- Input length limits enforced
- Allowlist validation preferred over denylist
Authentication & Sessions
- Passwords hashed with Argon2/bcrypt (not MD5/SHA1)
- Session tokens have sufficient entropy (128+ bits)
- Sessions invalidated on logout
- MFA available for sensitive operations
Access Control
- Check for framework-level auth middleware (e.g., Next.js middleware.ts, proxy.ts, Express middleware) before flagging missing per-route auth
- Authorization checked on every request
- Using object references user cannot manipulate
- Deny by default policy
- Privilege escalation paths reviewed
Data Protection
- Sensitive data encrypted at rest
- TLS for all data in transit
- No sensitive data in URLs/logs
- Secrets in environment/vault (not code)
Error Handling
- No stack traces exposed to users
- Fail-closed on errors (deny, not allow)
- All exceptions logged with context
- Consistent error responses (no enumeration)
Secure Code Patterns
SQL Injection Prevention
# UNSAFE
cursor.execute(f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = {user_id}")
# SAFE
cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = %s", (user_id,))
Command Injection Prevention
# UNSAFE
os.system(f"convert {filename} output.png")
# SAFE
subprocess.run(["convert", filename, "output.png"], shell=False)
Password Storage
# UNSAFE
hashlib.md5(password.encode()).hexdigest()
# SAFE
from argon2 import PasswordHasher
PasswordHasher().hash(password)
Access Control
# UNSAFE - No authorization check
@app.route('/api/user/<user_id>')
def get_user(user_id):
return db.get_user(user_id)
# SAFE - Authorization enforced
@app.route('/api/user/<user_id>')
@login_required
def get_user(user_id):
if current_user.id != user_id and not current_user.is_admin:
abort(403)
return db.get_user(user_id)
Error Handling
# UNSAFE - Exposes internals
@app.errorhandler(Exception)
def handle_error(e):
return str(e), 500
# SAFE - Fail-closed, log context
@app.errorhandler(Exception)
def handle_error(e):
error_id = uuid.uuid4()
logger.exception(f"Error {error_id}: {e}")
return {"error": "An error occurred", "id": str(error_id)}, 500
Fail-Closed Pattern
# UNSAFE - Fail-open
def check_permission(user, resource):
try:
return auth_service.check(user, resource)
except Exception:
return True # DANGEROUS!
# SAFE - Fail-closed
def check_permission(user, resource):
try:
return auth_service.check(user, resource)
except Exception as e:
logger.error(f"Auth check failed: {e}")
return False # Deny on error
Agentic AI Security (OWASP 2026)
When building or reviewing AI agent systems, check for:
| Risk | Description | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| ASI01: Goal Hijack | Prompt injection alters agent objectives | Input sanitization, goal boundaries, behavioral monitoring |
| ASI02: Tool Misuse | Tools used in unintended ways | Least privilege, fine-grained permissions, validate I/O |
| ASI03: Identity & Privilege Abuse | Delegated trust, inherited credentials, role chain exploits | Short-lived scoped tokens, identity verification |
| ASI04: Supply Chain | Compromised plugins/MCP servers | Verify signatures, sandbox, allowlist plugins |
| ASI05: Code Execution | Unsafe code generation/execution | Sandbox execution, static analysis, human approval |
| ASI06: Memory Poisoning | Corrupted RAG/context data | Validate stored content, segment by trust level |
| ASI07: Insecure Inter-Agent Comms | Spoofing/intercepting agent-to-agent messages | Authenticate, encrypt, verify message integrity |
| ASI08: Cascading Failures | Errors propagate across systems | Circuit breakers, graceful degradation, isolation |
| ASI09: Human-Agent Trust Exploitation | Over-trust in agents leveraged to manipulate users | Label AI content, user education, verification steps |
| ASI10: Rogue Agents | Compromised agents acting maliciously | Behavior monitoring, kill switches, anomaly detection |
Agent Security Checklist
- All agent inputs sanitized and validated
- Tools operate with minimum required permissions
- Credentials are short-lived and scoped
- Third-party plugins verified and sandboxed
- Code execution happens in isolated environments
- Agent communications authenticated and encrypted
- Circuit breakers between agent components
- Human approval for sensitive operations
- Behavior monitoring for anomaly detection
- Kill switch available for agent systems
ASVS 5.0 Key Requirements
Level 1 (All Applications)
- Passwords minimum 12 characters
- Check against breached password lists
- Rate limiting on authentication
- Session tokens 128+ bits entropy
- HTTPS everywhere
Level 2 (Sensitive Data)
- All L1 requirements plus:
- MFA for sensitive operations
- Cryptographic key management
- Comprehensive security logging
- Input validation on all parameters
Level 3 (Critical Systems)
- All L1/L2 requirements plus:
- Hardware security modules for keys
- Threat modeling documentation
- Advanced monitoring and alerting
- Penetration testing validation
Language-Specific Security Quirks
Important: The examples below are illustrative starting points, not exhaustive. When reviewing code, think like a senior security researcher: consider the language's memory model, type system, standard library pitfalls, ecosystem-specific attack vectors, and historical CVE patterns. Each language has deeper quirks beyond what's listed here.
Different languages have unique security pitfalls. Here are the top 20 languages with key security considerations. Go deeper for the specific language you're working in:
JavaScript / TypeScript
Main Risks: Prototype pollution, XSS, eval injection
// UNSAFE: Prototype pollution
Object.assign(target, userInput)
// SAFE: Use null prototype or validate keys
Object.assign(Object.create(null), validated)
// UNSAFE: eval injection
eval(userCode)
// SAFE: Never use eval with user input
Watch for: eval(), innerHTML, document.write(), prototype chain manipulation, __proto__
Python
Main Risks: Pickle deserialization, format string injection, shell injection
# UNSAFE: Pickle RCE
pickle.loads(user_data)
# SAFE: Use JSON or validate source
json.loads(user_data)
# UNSAFE: Format string injection
query = "SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = '%s'" % user_input
# SAFE: Parameterized
cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = %s", (user_input,))
Watch for: pickle, eval(), exec(), os.system(), subprocess with shell=True
Java
Main Risks: Deserialization RCE, XXE, JNDI injection
how to use owasp-securityHow to use owasp-security on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
1Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version)- ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add owasp-security
2Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
$npx skills add https://github.com/agamm/claude-code-owasp --skill owasp-securityThe skills CLI fetches
owasp-securityfrom GitHub repositoryagamm/claude-code-owaspand configures it for Cursor.3Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
◆ Which agents do you want to install to?││ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────│ • Amp│ • Antigravity│ • Cline│ • Codex│ ●Cursor(selected)│ • Cursor│ • Windsurf4Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
.cursor/skills/owasp-securityReload or restart Cursor to activate owasp-security. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g.,
/owasp-security) or your agent's skill management interface.⚠Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
Additional Resources
GET_STARTED →List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
✓Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
✓Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
✓Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
✓Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)
- No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviewsRatings
4.8★★★★★42 reviews
★★★★★Dev Bhatia· Dec 28, 2024We added owasp-security from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
★★★★★Zara Bhatia· Dec 24, 2024owasp-security fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
★★★★★Tariq Haddad· Dec 24, 2024Useful defaults in owasp-security — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
★★★★★Neel Flores· Nov 15, 2024We added owasp-security from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
★★★★★Chen Verma· Nov 11, 2024Useful defaults in owasp-security — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
★★★★★Neel Yang· Oct 6, 2024Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: owasp-security is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
★★★★★Neel Chen· Oct 2, 2024owasp-security has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
★★★★★Min Rao· Sep 21, 2024We added owasp-security from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
★★★★★Amina Mehta· Sep 13, 2024I recommend owasp-security for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
★★★★★Arya Haddad· Sep 9, 2024owasp-security reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
showing 1-10 of 42
1 / 5