# Assess Exploitation Workflows

Security teams need structured ways to review exploitation playbooks for authorized labs. This skill organizes exploit discovery, adaptation, shell handling, and access documentation steps.

## Install

```bash
npx skillstore add charleskozel/exploitation-knowledge
```

## Metadata

- - Slug: charleskozel-exploitation-knowledge
- - Version: 1.0.0
- - Author: CharlesKozel
- - GitHub username: CharlesKozel
- - License: MIT
- - Repository: https://github.com/CharlesKozel/Pentest-Agent-Evalulator/tree/main/agents/claude-tbug/skills/exploitation
- - Ref: main
- - Supported tools: Claude, Codex, Claude Code
- - Risk level: high
- - Risk factors: network, filesystem, external\_commands
- - Quality score: 38
- - Quality tier: warning
- - Public page: https://skillstore.pages.dev/skills/charleskozel-exploitation-knowledge
- - Manifest: https://skillstore.pages.dev/api/skills/charleskozel-exploitation-knowledge/manifest

## Capabilities

- Explains exploit discovery across local databases, Metasploit, GitHub, and advisories.
- Shows how to adapt proof-of-concept exploits for non-interactive environments.
- Provides reverse shell, listener setup, and shell stabilization workflows.
- Covers file upload, SQL injection, command injection, and public exploit paths.
- Describes environment probing and payload selection based on target tools.
- Defines output fields for documenting initial access and next steps.

## Use Cases

- Review an authorized lab exploit path: Map a discovered vulnerability to possible exploitation steps and validation checks within a controlled environment.
- Prepare a CTF initial access workflow: Organize exploit search, payload adaptation, shell handling, and user flag documentation for a challenge host.
- Audit risky exploitation guidance: Identify dangerous procedures, network dependencies, and filesystem access patterns in offensive security instructions.

## Prompt Templates

### Beginner lab review

```
Review this authorized lab vulnerability summary. List the exploitation planning steps, required checks, and safety boundaries without adding new targets.
```

### Exploit source comparison

```
Compare these authorized exploit sources for reliability, dependencies, and risks. Recommend a review order before any execution.
```

### Payload adaptation plan

```
Create a non-interactive adaptation plan for this approved lab proof of concept. Include assumptions, validation checks, and rollback steps.
```

### Advanced audit of exploitation workflow

```
Audit this exploitation workflow for marketplace safety. Separate dual-use educational content from actionable unsafe steps and propose safer wording.
```

## Limitations

- It assumes the user has explicit authorization for every target.
- It does not provide defensive remediation guidance for vulnerabilities.
- It can produce unsafe operational guidance if used outside a lab.
- It does not verify exploit sources or downloaded code safety.

## Best Practices

- Use only in environments where written authorization and scope are clear.
- Review every exploit source manually before running it in a sandbox.
- Document assumptions, target scope, observed evidence, and stopping conditions.

## Anti Patterns

- Using the guidance against systems without explicit authorization.
- Running downloaded proof-of-concept code without review or isolation.
- Treating shell access or flag capture as acceptable outside a lab.

## Security Audit

- - Safe to publish: false
- - Audited at: 2026-06-28T21:34:42.978\+00:00
- - Summary: Static findings are mostly true positives for dangerous instructional content, not for hidden executable malware. The skill provides actionable exploitation workflows, reverse shells, Metasploit usage, SQL injection shell access, file reads, credential testing, and flag capture. No evidence found of prompt injection or automatic code execution during skill loading.

## Stats

- - Views: 307
- - Downloads: 6
- - Favorites: 0
- - Popularity score: 0