Patent Landscape

• Outcome: Review
• Latest audit: Sep 16, 2026 · 3:56 AM UTC
• Version: 1.0.0

Overview

The skill is not technically invasive, but it presents hard-coded mock patent and freedom-to-operate output as if it were real analysis.

Treat this as a demonstration only unless the publisher adds real patent-data retrieval, source provenance, jurisdiction-specific analysis, and clear legal limitations. Do not rely on its outputs for R&D, licensing, investment, or freedom-to-operate decisions.

A.I.G

Vulnerability Patterns

• Insecure Skill Coding Practices: Finds exploitable flaws such as hardcoded secrets or command injection
• Skill Instruction Hijacking: Alters the agent's session goals or safety constraints when the skill loads
• Agent Memory Poisoning: Writes attacker-controlled rules into memory that affect later sessions
• Remote Payload Retrieval and Execution: Fetches external code whose behavior can change after review
• Embedded Malicious Code: Ships malicious scripts inside the skill and executes them locally

Findings (1)

T09 · Insecure Skill Coding Practices

Warning

• Location: scripts/main.py:15

Finding

Unsupported Mock Data Presented as Patent Landscape and Freedom-to-Operate Analysis

Content

View full analysis

Vulnerability Details

File Location: scripts/main.py:15-23
Vulnerability Type: Misleading fabricated analysis caused by insecure implementation practices
Risk Level: Medium

python

      # Mock analysis
      landscape = {
          "target": target_name,
          "therapeutic_area": therapeutic_area,
          "patent_activity": "High" if target_name.lower() in ["pd1", "her2"] else "Moderate",
          "key_players": ["Company A", "Company B", "Company C"],
          "white_space": ["Combination therapies", "Novel indications"],
          "freedom_to_operate": "Limited - many blocking patents"
      }

Technical Analysis

The executable does not search patent databases, inspect patent claims, validate patent status, evaluate jurisdictions, analyze citations, or collect evidence from any other authoritative source. Instead, it generates fixed placeholder companies, generic white-space opportunities, and an unsupported freedom-to-operate conclusion for every supplied target.

The only input-dependent assessment marks pd1 and her2 as having “High” patent activity and assigns “Moderate” to every other target. The freedom-to-operate result is always reported as “Limited - many blocking patents,” irrespective of the target, therapeutic area, jurisdiction, relevant claims, expiration dates, or legal status.

This behavior conflicts with the documented patent-search and freedom-to-operate capabilities in SKILL.md and with its prohibition against fabricating data, citations, search results, or execution outcomes. The CLI output does not identify itself as demonstration data, so downstream users or agents could treat it as an evidence-based assessment.

Attack Path

1. A user or downstream agent requests a patent-landscape or freedom-to-operate assessment for a therapeutic target.
2. The agent invokes scripts/main.py with user-controlled --target and --area values.
3. `analyze_targe ...[truncated 1538 chars]

Remediation

View remediation

Remediation Suggestions

1. Remove the hard-coded patent activity, competitor, white-space, and freedom-to-operate conclusions from the production execution path.
2. Require authoritative patent records as input or implement retrieval from approved patent data sources before producing substantive conclusions.
3. Attach evidence to every material result, including patent or publication identifiers, assignees, jurisdictions, claim relevance, legal status, filing and expiration dates, and retrieval timestamps.
4. If the implementation remains a demonstration, label all output prominently as synthetic mock data and prevent it from being described as a genuine patent or freedom-to-operate assessment.
5. Do not issue a freedom-to-operate conclusion without jurisdiction-specific claim mapping, patent-family analysis, current legal-status verification, and explicit limitations.
6. Add a disclaimer that freedom-to-operate analysis is not legal advice and requires review by qualified patent counsel.
7. Fail safely when evidence is unavailable. The script should report the missing inputs and unresolved checks rather than generating placeholder conclusions.
8. Add validation tests confirming that reports cannot be produced without supporting records and that every reported competitor or patent-risk conclusion contains traceable citations.
9. Align SKILL.md with the actual implementation, including correcting references to nonexistent modules and scripts so users are not led to expect unsupported capabilities.

SkillSpector

Vulnerability Patterns

• MCP Tool Poisoning: Hidden Instructions, Unicode Deception, Parameter Description Injection
• Prompt Injection: Instruction Override, Hidden Instructions, Exfiltration Commands
• Data Exfiltration: External Transmission, Env Variable Harvesting, File System Enumeration
• Privilege Escalation: Excessive Permissions, Sudo/Root Execution, Credential Access
• Supply Chain: Unpinned Dependencies, External Script Fetching, Obfuscated Code

Findings (1)

Tp4

High

• Category: MCP Tool Poisoning
• Confidence: 95% confidence

Finding

The skill advertises comprehensive biotech patent landscape, competitor, and freedom-to-operate analysis, but the finding indicates the implementation is mock or static and lacks real patent retrieval or substantive analysis. In this context, users may rely on fabricated or incomplete outputs for legal, R&D, licensing, or market decisions, creating material business and compliance risk even without classic code-execution behavior.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Static analysis

No suspicious patterns detected.