T08 · Insecure Dependencies
- Location
SKILL.md:55- Finding
Unpinned and Unauditable Third-Party Package Installation
- Content
View full analysis
- Remediation
View remediation
Security audit
Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk
This skill is about private computation, but it advertises strong privacy and compliance protections that its own documentation says are not implemented yet.
Review this carefully before installing. Do not rely on it for zero-knowledge execution, TEE isolation, HIPAA/GDPR compliance, medical, financial, or other regulated workloads unless the publisher provides the actual reviewed implementation, version pinning, key-management details, audit-log safeguards, and evidence that the advertised security modes are implemented and fail closed when unavailable.
SKILL.md:55Unpinned and Unauditable Third-Party Package Installation
SKILL.md:24Security and Compliance Claims Contradict Documented Implementation Status
The skill markets itself as providing current 'zero-knowledge execution' and privacy/security assurances, but the body of the document later states that zero-knowledge proofs and TEE isolation are future or planned features. This can cause users to rely on non-existent protections for highly sensitive workloads such as medical, financial, or private-context processing, creating a dangerous mismatch between perceived and actual security guarantees.
The documentation states that 'strict' mode provides zero-knowledge proofs, while other sections say that zero-knowledge functionality is only planned. Users may select 'strict' mode believing it adds strong cryptographic privacy guarantees when it may not do anything beyond the MVP feature set, leading to unsafe deployment decisions in regulated or high-sensitivity environments.
The API reference advertises a 'proof' execution option for generating zero-knowledge proofs, but the roadmap says proof generation is a future feature. This is dangerous because integrators may build compliance or privacy workflows around proof artifacts that are never actually produced or verified, resulting in silent security failure.
The skill strongly encourages audit logging for sensitive tasks but does not warn that task metadata, identifiers, or operational details may themselves contain sensitive information. In a privacy-focused skill, this omission is more dangerous because users may assume all logging is inherently safe and accidentally create durable records of regulated or confidential data.
The examples show storing API keys and other secrets locally through a simple API without warning users about where secrets are stored, how the master key is managed, and what local compromise would expose. In this context, the risk is amplified because the skill is explicitly marketed for sensitive and regulated workloads, so users may overtrust local secret handling without understanding their operational responsibilities.