Security audit

Amazon Brand Accelerator

Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk

Overview

This is a Chinese-language Amazon brand-building guide with a small local scoring script and no evidence of credential access, hidden execution, persistence, or account automation.

Install this if you want Chinese-language Amazon brand-building guidance. Before acting on trademark, advertising, or Amazon policy advice, verify current official requirements or consult a qualified professional, since those rules and fees can change.

A.I.G

Vulnerability Patterns

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
Unauthorized Access and Privilege EscalationObtains permissions beyond the task's legitimate needs

SkillSpector

Vulnerability Patterns

Prompt InjectionInstruction Override, Hidden Instructions, Exfiltration Commands
Data ExfiltrationExternal Transmission, Env Variable Harvesting, File System Enumeration
Privilege EscalationExcessive Permissions, Sudo/Root Execution, Credential Access
Supply ChainUnpinned Dependencies, External Script Fetching, Obfuscated Code
Excessive AgencyUnrestricted Tool Access, Autonomous Decision Making, Scope Creep

Findings (6)

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Medium

Confidence: 94% confidence
Finding: The README uses Chinese throughout its title, section headings, content, and warning text, but does not indicate that the skill is region-specific or provide any user opt-in for language. This can violate language/locale policy because it effectively forces a specific language on all users.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Medium

Confidence: 96% confidence
Finding: The markdown instructs and describes the skill exclusively in Chinese, including headings, guidance, and user prompts, but does not indicate that the user can choose another language. Under the policy for natural-language violations, forcing a specific language without user opt-in is reportable unless the locale restriction is explicitly justified.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 83% confidence
Finding: Line L341 states that all text should be translated into the target market's language, which imposes a locale requirement in natural-language guidance. The file does not present this as a user choice or opt-in, and no explicit justification is given for why a fixed locale requirement must apply in all cases.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 81% confidence
Finding: The entire skill reference is written only in Chinese and does not indicate that users may choose another language or that the framework is intended exclusively for a Chinese-language or region-specific audience. Under the stated policy, forcing a specific language without opt-in is a natural-language policy concern.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 93% confidence
Finding: 该技能文件从标题到使用说明均仅以中文呈现，未向用户提供语言/locale 选择，也未说明该文档仅面向特定中文用户群体。根据语言/locale 政策，若未获得用户选择或缺少明确限定，强制单一语言属于自然语言层面的政策问题。

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 82% confidence
Finding: The module docstring presents the skill as primarily Chinese-language content while embedding English terminology and provides no indication that users can select their preferred language or locale. Because the policy calls for flagging language/locale constraints without user opt-in, this is a mild natural-language policy concern.

Static analysis

No suspicious patterns detected.