Audit History

All static findings are false positives caused by markdown code fences, inline backticks, ordinary Python imports, statistical wording, and a documentation link. No evidence found of prompt injection, data exfiltration intent, shell execution, or active network behavior in the reviewed context.

All static findings are false positives caused by markdown code fences, inline backticks, ordinary Python imports, statistical wording, and a documentation link. No evidence found of prompt injection, data exfiltration intent, shell execution, or active network behavior in the reviewed context.

The static analyzer reported many high-risk patterns, but review found these are false positives from Markdown code fences, statistical notation, and documentation links. The only real risk factor is a local Python helper script for statistical assumption checks, with no evidence of shell execution, network requests, credential access, file deletion, or prompt injection.

All 190 static findings are FALSE POSITIVES. The 'external_commands' detections are Python code examples in markdown documentation blocks (not shell execution). The 'weak cryptographic algorithm' detections are triggered by common words like 'comprehensive' in documentation text at line 3 of markdown files. The 'system reconnaissance' detections flag statistical terms like ACF/PACF (Autocorrelation Function). This is a legitimate statistical analysis documentation skill with no security risks.

All 190 static findings are FALSE POSITIVES. The 'external_commands' detections are Python code examples in markdown documentation blocks (not shell execution). The 'weak cryptographic algorithm' detections are triggered by common words like 'comprehensive' in documentation text at line 3 of markdown files. The 'system reconnaissance' detections flag statistical terms like ACF/PACF (Autocorrelation Function). This is a legitimate statistical analysis documentation skill with no security risks.

The static analysis findings are false positives. The 'external_commands' detections are from code examples showing Python syntax (backticks in markdown), not actual shell execution. The 'weak cryptographic algorithm' findings appear to be from line 3 references to standard markdown headers, not crypto code. No actual security risks identified.

Documentation-only skill with a local Python utility. No network access, no file system access beyond temp plotting, no credential theft patterns, no malicious code execution. The assumption_checks.py script only operates on user-provided data in memory.