Security audit
Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk
This is a local EHS table-checking skill with no network or credential behavior found, though it does keep a small local usage counter for its trial limit.
Before installing, understand that this is a Chinese-language local compliance table checker, not a substitute for legal advice, regulator review, or field inspection. It reads only the material you provide, does not appear to send data over the network, and keeps a local trial-use counter in your home directory that may block use after 5 runs and show subscription messaging.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
If the real logic only covers wastewater fee and water-quality reconciliation, then claiming support for equipment inspections, fire systems, gas safety, and other EHS records is materially misleading. In this context, the danger comes from operational reliance on nonexistent checks, not from traditional exploit primitives.
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --list # 看覆盖了哪些子问题
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --list # 看覆盖了哪些子问题
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --list # 看覆盖了哪些子问题
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --list # 看覆盖了哪些子问题
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --list # 看覆盖了哪些子问题
The skill uses 'env' capability that is not listed in its permissions. This may indicate deceptive intent or missing permission declarations.
The manifest describes a skill that routes among 12 named subskills such as boiler/pressure-vessel inspection, carbon-emissions report checking, elevator maintenance records, fire-facility maintenance, and gas-facility safety checks. This file instead documents and implements a specialized engine for '医疗废物交接与暂存记录核对', a medical-waste handover/storage ledger audit that is not among the manifest’s declared subskills.
The file’s actual behavior materially diverges from the skill’s declared purpose: instead of an EHS/OHS expert covering the listed industrial compliance subskills, it implements a school-bus auditing engine with different required columns, checks, and conclusions. This kind of scope mismatch is dangerous because users or upstream orchestrators may route sensitive industrial compliance data into the wrong analyzer and rely on incorrect or missing conclusions, creating a silent integrity failure in safety/compliance workflows.
The header comment claims the public version contains all 12 sub-skill engines fully in-package and never relies on remote or subscription-only components, yet later logic allows some sub-skills to be absent locally. In a safety/compliance skill, that mismatch is more dangerous because users may assume complete local audit coverage and miss that requested checks are unavailable.
The help output states that all sub-skills are complete, local, and available, but the actual runtime can deny execution for sub-skills whose engines are not present and route users to a subscription version. This creates a trust and integrity problem: operators may believe they have full offline compliance tooling when they do not.
The script tells users that all 12 sub-skills are complete and local, but the runtime explicitly checks for missing local engines and redirects some functions to a subscription-only version. This is a deceptive capability claim rather than code execution risk, but it can mislead users into trusting coverage, purchasing under false pretenses, or relying on a package that does not actually contain the promised offline functionality.
The trigger list includes very generic keywords such as “免费”, “对账”, and “核对”, which can match routine user requests unrelated to this EHS skill. That creates over-broad activation boundaries, increasing the chance the wrong subskill is selected and causing unintended processing of user data or misleading compliance conclusions.
These subskills also rely on ambiguous keywords that are common in ordinary business conversations, without scope guards tying them to a specific compliance workflow. An attacker or normal user could unintentionally trigger the wrong checker, leading to misrouting, incorrect validation, or disclosure of compliance-oriented reasoning in the wrong context.
The repeated reuse of broad triggers like “核对” and “对账” across many subskills creates overlapping invocation boundaries throughout the manifest. In a router-driven skill system, this can produce nondeterministic or attacker-influenced routing, which may yield wrong compliance judgments, process the wrong uploaded table, or bypass expected user clarification steps.
This code file contains extensive natural-language instructions, messages, and operational guidance exclusively in Chinese. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without user opt-in can be a locale/language policy violation unless clearly justified as region-specific; the file does not explicitly offer a language choice or state such a constraint as a requirement.
This JavaScript file’s descriptive comments and multiple returned user-facing messages are written exclusively in Chinese, and the skill does not indicate that users may choose another language. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without user opt-in is a natural-language policy violation unless the locale restriction is clearly justified.