Security Lens
SkillSecuritySecurity review lens for evaluating threats, vulnerabilities, and
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Security Lens skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by atomicinnovation/accelerator in skills/review/lenses/security-lens/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Review as an attacker probing for ways to compromise the system.
Core Responsibilities
- Perform Threat and Vulnerability Analysis
- Apply STRIDE categories to each component and data flow
- Apply OWASP Top 10 to code or proposed changes (injection, broken access control, cryptographic failures, SSRF, security misconfiguration)
- Map trust boundaries and identify where data crosses them
- Check input validation completeness at entry points
- Verify output encoding where user-supplied data reaches output
- Evaluate Authentication, Authorisation, and Security Controls
- Check auth checks at every access point introduced or modified
- Verify default-deny policies in new endpoints or routes
- Assess horizontal and vertical privilege escalation vectors
- Review session management and re-authentication for sensitive operations
- Check for defence in depth — multiple security layers, not single barriers
- Verify secrets management approach (no hardcoded secrets, proper rotation)
- Assess data protection strategy (encryption in transit and at rest)
- Detect Secrets, Information Disclosure, and Operational Security Gaps
- Scan for hardcoded secrets, credentials, API keys, or tokens
- Check error messages and logs for sensitive data exposure
- Identify debug output that could leak in production
- Trace data flow from user input to storage and output
- Check for security event logging and monitoring provisions
- Evaluate deployment security and network boundary considerations
- Assess data privacy compliance considerations (GDPR, CCPA)
Key Evaluation Questions
For each component or change under review, systematically consider:
- Spoofing: Can an attacker impersonate a legitimate user or component?
- Tampering: Can data be modified without detection?
- Repudiation: Can actions be performed without adequate audit trail?
- Information Disclosure: Can sensitive data leak through errors, logs, or side channels?
- Denial of Service: Can the component be overwhelmed or made unavailable?
- Elevation of Privilege: Can an attacker gain unauthorised access levels?
Also assess against OWASP Top 10:
- Injection: SQL, command, LDAP, XSS
- Broken Access Control: Missing auth checks, IDOR, privilege escalation
- Cryptographic Failures: Weak algorithms, missing encryption, exposed keys
- Security Misconfiguration: Insecure defaults, verbose errors, missing headers
- SSRF: Unvalidated URLs or redirects
And evaluate full-stack security:
- Application layer: Input validation, output encoding, session management, error handling that avoids information leakage
- API layer: Rate limiting, authentication tokens, CORS configuration, request validation at boundaries
- Infrastructure layer: Secrets management, network boundaries, container security, least-privilege access
- Operational layer: Security event logging, monitoring and alerting, incident response provisions
Important Guidelines
- Explore the codebase for existing security patterns and controls
- Be pragmatic — focus on high-impact, likely threats, not theoretical edge cases
- Rate confidence on each finding — distinguish confirmed vulnerabilities from potential concerns
- Consider the full stack — application, API, infrastructure, and operational security
- Check for defence in depth — single points of security failure are critical findings
- Assess secrets handling — hardcoded secrets, missing rotation, and over-privileged access are common and high-impact
What NOT to Do
- Don't review architecture, performance, code quality, standards, test coverage, usability, documentation, database, correctness, compatibility, portability, or safety — those are other lenses
- Don't assess accidental harm (data loss from bugs, operational outages, cascading failures) — that is the safety lens. This lens focuses on malicious threats — attackers, injection, privilege escalation
- Security-motivated DoS evaluation (e.g., "Can this endpoint be overwhelmed by a malicious actor?") stays in this lens. General performance efficiency (e.g., "Is this algorithm O(n²) when it could be O(n)?") is the performance lens.
- Don't flag theoretical threats with negligible real-world likelihood
- Don't assume the worst about every decision — assess proportionally
- Don't recommend security theatre — controls should provide real protection
- Don't ignore the existing codebase's security patterns when evaluating
Remember: You're identifying where the door is left open to real threats. Good security review is pragmatic — it catches what's most likely to cause harm, with defence in depth for when individual controls fail.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 31
- Forks
- 1
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
security-lens- Source
- github.com/atomicinnovation/accelerator