Security audit

travel-guide（本地土著旅游攻略）

Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk

Overview

This is a Markdown-only travel guide skill with purpose-aligned advice and no evidence of code execution, persistence, credential handling, or data exfiltration.

Install this if you want a bilingual, China-oriented travel planning helper. Expect it to ask for travel dates, group size, budget, transportation, lodging, and preferences; verify current visa, safety, weather, opening-hours, and booking information before relying on its advice.

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
Trigger AbuseOverly Broad Trigger, Shadow Command Trigger, Keyword Baiting Trigger
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

Findings (39)

Vague Triggers

Medium

Confidence: 96% confidence
Finding: The README tells users to 'trigger this skill in OpenClaw' but does not define a distinct invocation phrase, eligibility conditions, or clear scope boundaries. Vague activation guidance can cause accidental or overly broad invocation, increasing the chance the agent applies this travel skill in unintended contexts and produces irrelevant or unsafe guidance based on incomplete user intent.

Vague Triggers

Medium

Confidence: 97% confidence
Finding: The skill advertises an extremely broad set of travel-related trigger phrases, including many generic intents such as 'travel recommendation', 'trip planning', 'where to travel', and holiday/destination names. This can cause over-invocation in ordinary conversations, increasing the chance the skill captures requests outside its intended scope and overrides more specific or safer routing logic.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Medium

Confidence: 91% confidence
Finding: The document is written as a Chinese-language travel guide, including Chinese-only explanatory content throughout, without indicating that language selection is optional. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without user opt-in is a natural-language policy violation unless the locale constraint is clearly documented and justified.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 82% confidence
Finding: The file consistently presents instructions and content in both Chinese and English, but it does not state that the agent should first detect or ask for the user's preferred language. This can conflict with a language/locale policy that requires user choice rather than imposing a fixed presentation style.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 83% confidence
Finding: This markdown file uses a fixed Chinese/English presentation throughout, which can be interpreted as a language/locale policy choice imposed on the user. Under the policy rule, language constraints should either be optional for the user or clearly justified as region-specific; this file does not explicitly provide that justification.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 83% confidence
Finding: The travel guide is predominantly written in Chinese, with only limited bilingual headings, and does not indicate that the language choice is optional or targeted to a China-specific or Chinese-speaking audience. Under the policy rule, content that imposes a specific language without user opt-in can be a natural-language policy violation.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 83% confidence
Finding: This markdown file contains user-facing travel guidance primarily in Chinese and does not indicate that language selection is optional. The policy requires flagging cases where a skill forces a specific language or locale without user opt-in.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 86% confidence
Finding: This markdown file contains user-facing travel guidance primarily in Chinese, and there is no indication that the user can choose another language or that the skill is intentionally restricted to Chinese-language use. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without user opt-in is a natural-language policy concern.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 93% confidence
Finding: The entire document is written as a fixed Chinese/English bilingual guide, which imposes a language/locale format on users without any opt-in or indication that the skill is intentionally region- or audience-specific. Under the stated policy, forcing a specific language or locale without user choice can be a natural-language policy violation.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 0% confidence
Finding: After reviewing the file, there is no natural-language policy violation matching SQP-3. The content does not force a language without user opt-in in a way that clearly violates the stated rule.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 76% confidence
Finding: This markdown file consistently embeds Chinese content and locale-specific presentation throughout the guide. Under the policy rule for natural-language violations, forcing a specific language or locale without offering a user choice can be considered a language/locale policy issue.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 78% confidence
Finding: The file presents all user-facing guidance bilingually but with substantial Chinese-language content throughout, and there is no indication that the user can choose language or locale. Under the policy rule, forcing a specific language or locale without opt-in can be a natural-language policy violation unless the regional constraint is explicitly justified.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 78% confidence
Finding: The travel guide content is primarily written in Chinese, with bilingual headings but no indication that users can choose another language or that the skill is intentionally limited to Chinese-speaking users. Under the policy rule, forcing a specific language without opt-in can be a natural-language policy concern.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 79% confidence
Finding: The document consistently presents all headings and labels bilingually, but it does not indicate whether this mixed-language format is optional or tailored to a specific user preference. Under the stated policy, forcing a language or locale presentation without explicit opt-in can be a natural-language policy concern.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 82% confidence
Finding: The file consistently presents all headings and guidance in Chinese with English translations, implying a fixed language/locale format for all users. The policy requires avoiding forced language choices unless the skill offers language selection or clearly justifies the locale constraint.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 79% confidence
Finding: The entire document is bilingual but consistently framed around Chinese users, including Chinese headings and a China-specific visa statement. This can be interpreted as a locale/language preference baked into the skill content without stating that users may choose another language or locale.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 83% confidence
Finding: This file consistently presents content in Chinese alongside English headings and Chinese-specific travel guidance such as visa information for Chinese citizens. Under the policy rule, forcing or assuming a specific language/locale without opt-in can be a natural-language policy concern when no audience limitation or choice is documented.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 84% confidence
Finding: The guide states visa requirements specifically for Chinese citizens, which imposes a nationality-specific assumption in user-facing natural language without indicating that the content is tailored only for that audience. This can violate language/locale policy expectations when a skill should avoid forcing a specific user context unless clearly documented.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 90% confidence
Finding: This travel guide presents its substantive content in Chinese, including headings and body text, without indicating that other languages are available or that the language choice is optional. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without user opt-in can be a natural-language policy violation.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 86% confidence
Finding: This travel guide presents headings and content bilingually, but much of the substantive guidance is primarily in Chinese with some English fragments. Under the language/locale policy rule, content that imposes a specific language or locale without user opt-in can be a policy concern when no language choice or scope justification is stated.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 78% confidence
Finding: This markdown file contains user-facing travel guidance in Chinese throughout, with no indication that other languages are available or that the user can opt into this locale. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without user opt-in can be a natural-language policy violation.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 95% confidence
Finding: This markdown skill content presents all substantive guidance in Chinese and does not indicate any user opt-in, alternative language availability, or region-specific justification for the language constraint. That can violate a language/locale policy requiring user choice rather than forcing a specific language by default.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 92% confidence
Finding: The document presents all guidance in Chinese or bilingual Chinese-first form, and line L08 specifically targets Chinese citizens for visa guidance. For a general destination skill, this imposes a specific language/locale context without any stated user opt-in or justification, which matches the language/locale policy concern.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 90% confidence
Finding: This markdown skill content is written entirely in Chinese, including headings and guidance, with no indication that users can choose another language or that the file is intentionally limited to a Chinese-speaking audience. Under the policy rule, forcing a specific language without opt-in can be a natural-language policy violation.

Natural-Language Policy Violations

Low

Confidence: 95% confidence
Finding: This markdown file presents the travel guide entirely in Chinese, including headings and instructions, which effectively forces a specific language for users. The file does not offer an opt-in language choice or explain that the skill is intended only for Chinese-speaking users, so it conflicts with the language/locale policy criteria.

Static analysis

No suspicious patterns detected.