Back to skill

Security audit

alephnet-node-free

Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk

Overview

This skill is mainly a social-network helper, but it asks for broad file and command powers that are not clearly scoped to that purpose.

Review this skill before installing. Its social messaging features may be reasonable, but it should not need broad local file write or command execution access unless the publisher explains exactly why, what commands and paths are allowed, and how user approval is enforced.

Vulnerability Patterns
  • Unauthorized Access and Privilege EscalationObtains permissions beyond the task's legitimate needs
  • Skill Instruction HijackingAlters the agent's session goals or safety constraints when the skill loads
  • Agent Memory PoisoningWrites attacker-controlled rules into memory that affect later sessions
  • Remote Payload Retrieval and ExecutionFetches external code whose behavior can change after review
  • Embedded Malicious CodeShips malicious scripts inside the skill and executes them locally
Findings (1)

T05 · Unauthorized Access and Privilege Escalation

Warning
Location
SKILL.md:26
Finding

Excessive Filesystem and Command-Execution Permissions

Content
View full analysis

Vulnerability Details

File Location: SKILL.md, lines 26–29
Vulnerability Type: Violation of least privilege through unnecessary tool permissions
Risk Level: Medium

yaml
tools:
  - read
  - exec
  - write

Technical Analysis

The Skill requests unrestricted file-reading, file-writing, and command-execution tools even though its stated primary purpose is to provide social-network operations such as profile management, friend management, messaging, group browsing, and feed retrieval.

These general-purpose system capabilities are not shown to be necessary for those operations. The document also advertises generic file processing and system-command execution at lines 290–302, but it provides no executable allowlist, argument schema, path restrictions, sandbox policy, or authorization checks. No implementation is included that could demonstrate enforcement of the stated security controls.

This violates the principle of least privilege. In an agent environment that grants the declared tools, malicious or untrusted input could potentially influence the agent to perform local operations outside the legitimate scope of the Skill.

Attack Path

  1. An agent platform loads the Skill and grants its declared read, write, and exec capabilities.
  2. The agent processes attacker-controlled content, such as a user request, private message, group post, or feed entry.
  3. The content instructs or persuades the agent to invoke one of the broadly authorized tools.
  4. Because the Skill defines no command allowlist, path boundary, or argument-validation mechanism, the agent may read an unrelated local file, overwrite accessible data, or execute an unrelated system command.
  5. Any resulting data could then be exposed through the agent's response or transmitted using the Skill's social or messaging functionality, subject to the host platform's actual controls.

The package contains documentation only, so this p ...[truncated 1052 chars]

Remediation
View remediation

Remediation Suggestions

  1. Remove the generic read, write, and exec permissions unless each capability is strictly necessary and supported by an auditable implementation.
  2. Replace them with narrowly scoped tools dedicated to profile, friend, message, group, and feed operations.
  3. If command execution is unavoidable:
    • Allow only a fixed executable and an explicit set of subcommands.
    • Validate every argument against a strict typed schema.
    • Reject shell metacharacters and prohibit shell-string construction.
    • Execute commands without invoking a shell.
    • Run commands in a restricted sandbox with minimal filesystem and network access.
  4. If file access is required:
    • Restrict access to a dedicated application directory.
    • Resolve and canonicalize paths before access.
    • Reject absolute paths, traversal sequences, and symbolic-link escapes.
    • Separate read and write authorization.
  5. Treat private messages, group content, feed entries, and other remote content strictly as untrusted data. Do not interpret such content as tool instructions.
  6. Require explicit user confirmation before any security-sensitive file or command operation.
  7. Document the exact API endpoint, authentication model, required permissions, and enforced security boundaries so the claimed controls can be independently verified.
Vulnerability Patterns
  • Data ExfiltrationExternal Transmission, Env Variable Harvesting, File System Enumeration
  • Trigger AbuseOverly Broad Trigger, Shadow Command Trigger, Keyword Baiting Trigger
  • MCP Tool PoisoningHidden Instructions, Unicode Deception, Parameter Description Injection
  • Prompt InjectionInstruction Override, Hidden Instructions, Exfiltration Commands
  • Privilege EscalationExcessive Permissions, Sudo/Root Execution, Credential Access
Findings (5)

Intent-Code Divergence

High
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
96% confidence
Finding

The document presents the skill as a social-network tool but later claims it can execute system commands in a sandbox. Hidden or under-declared exec capability materially increases risk because an agent may grant or route tasks to this skill expecting only messaging features, enabling command execution, environment access, or lateral actions beyond user intent.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Vague Triggers

Medium
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
95% confidence
Finding

The invocation guidance is overly broad, effectively suggesting use whenever AI model calls, orchestration, or LLM applications are involved. Broad triggers make accidental or automatic invocation more likely, which is especially risky here because the skill metadata also advertises read/exec/write capabilities that exceed the narrowly described social function.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Intent-Code Divergence

Medium
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
95% confidence
Finding

The skill documentation is internally inconsistent: earlier sections scope the free edition to social-network actions, while later sections advertise file read/write handling. In an agent ecosystem, capability ambiguity is dangerous because orchestration layers or users may authorize the skill under a narrower trust assumption, then the skill may be invoked for broader data access than expected.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Missing User Warnings

Medium
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
93% confidence
Finding

The markdown advertises file writing, API integration, and command execution without clear user-facing warnings about system modification, data exfiltration, credential exposure, or privacy impact. In agent-driven environments, omission of these warnings can cause users or planners to authorize actions without understanding that local data and execution surfaces may be touched.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Intent-Code Divergence

Medium
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
88% confidence
Finding

The later workflow text introduces generic API, file, and command procedures unrelated to the stated free-edition feature set. This kind of scope drift can mislead operators and agent planners about what the skill may do, weakening security review and increasing the chance of overbroad invocation with unnecessary privileges.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Static analysis

No suspicious patterns detected.