Historial de auditorías
ops-engineer - 4 auditorías
Comparación de versiones
Cambios de capacidades y hallazgos entre versiones auditadas, primero las más recientes.
23 jul 2026, 23:45
All 20 static findings are false positives caused by Markdown fences, inline code formatting, Chinese text, or legitimate operational terminology. The file contains readable guidance, not obfuscated content, executable backticks, privilege-escalation commands, or malicious reconnaissance. However, the skill authorizes broad operational execution without mandatory approval and rollback safeguards, creating a high-impact change risk.
Preocupaciones de seguridad confirmadas (1)
Factores de riesgo
15 jul 2026, 15:24
Most static findings are false positives caused by Markdown fences, inline formatting, Chinese text, and legitimate diagnostic terminology. However, the skill directs the agent to execute infrastructure commands without explicit approval boundaries for privileged or state-changing work. Add scope validation, approval, secret-handling, and rollback requirements before publication.
Preocupaciones de seguridad confirmadas (1)
Factores de riesgo
15 jul 2026, 15:24
Most static findings are false positives caused by Markdown fences, inline formatting, Chinese text, and legitimate diagnostic terminology. However, the skill directs the agent to execute infrastructure commands without explicit approval boundaries for privileged or state-changing work. Add scope validation, approval, secret-handling, and rollback requirements before publication.
Preocupaciones de seguridad confirmadas (1)
Factores de riesgo
15 jul 2026, 15:24
Most static findings are false positives caused by Markdown fences, inline formatting, Chinese text, and legitimate diagnostic terminology. However, the skill directs the agent to execute infrastructure commands without explicit approval boundaries for privileged or state-changing work. Add scope validation, approval, secret-handling, and rollback requirements before publication.