Skip to content
Back to skills

Tighten Policy

FSecurity

Analyze and tighten ClawdStrike security policies

  • 290 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added June 5, 2026
securityshellbashdockerawsazuregitapidatabasesecurity

Works with

  • api
  • mcp

Security analysis

F35/100
  • criticalPipes output to a shell interpreter
  • criticalAccesses sensitive system or user directories
  • highPerforms destructive filesystem operations

Pro shows the line behind each finding and how to fix it

Scanned June 5, 2026

npx -y skills add backbay-labs/clawdstrike --skill tighten-policy --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Tighten Policy?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Tighten Policy
[![Security: F — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/backbay-labs-tighten-policy/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/backbay-labs-tighten-policy)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
description: "Analyze and tighten ClawdStrike security policies"
---

# Tighten Policy

## Workflow

### Step 1: Assess Current State

1. **Validate** — Call `workbench_validate_policy` to check for errors.
2. **List guards** — Call `workbench_list_guards` to see all 13 available guards.
3. **Check compliance** — Call `workbench_compliance_check` to identify framework gaps.

### Step 2: Identify Gaps

Compare the policy against the guard registry to find:
- **Disabled guards** that should be enabled for the use case
- **Missing configuration** (e.g., egress allowlist with no domains listed)
- **Overly permissive defaults** (e.g., `default_action: allow` on MCP tools)
- **Missing patterns** (e.g., forbidden paths not covering cloud credentials)

### Step 3: Generate Test Scenarios

Call `workbench_suggest_scenarios` to automatically generate scenarios for enabled guards, then add custom scenarios targeting identified gaps.

### Step 4: Run Scenarios and Verify

Use `workbench_run_all_scenarios` to batch-test. Focus on:
- Attack scenarios that should be **denied** but are **allowed** (false negatives)
- Benign scenarios that should be **allowed** but are **denied** (false positives)

### Step 5: Apply Tightening Changes

For each identified gap, recommend specific YAML changes.

## Guard-by-Guard Tightening Checklist

### Forbidden Path (filesystem)
- [ ] Cover SSH keys: `**/.ssh/**`
- [ ] Cover cloud credentials: `**/.aws/**`, `**/.config/gcloud/**`, `**/.azure/**`
- [ ] Cover environment files: `**/.env`, `**/.env.*`
- [ ] Cover git credentials: `**/.git-credentials`, `**/.gitconfig`
- [ ] Cover Docker/K8s: `**/.docker/**`, `**/.kube/**`
- [ ] Cover system files: `/etc/shadow`, `/etc/passwd`

### Egress Allowlist (network)
- [ ] Set `default_action: block` (not allow)
- [ ] Only allow domains the agent actually needs
- [ ] Use specific domains instead of broad wildcards where possible
- [ ] Consider blocking high-risk TLDs

### Secret Leak (content)
- [ ] Enable with patterns for: AWS keys, GitHub tokens, private keys
- [ ] Add patterns for: API keys, database URLs, JWTs
- [ ] Set severity levels appropriately (critical for keys, warning for potential)

### Shell Command (tools)
- [ ] Enable to block: `rm -rf /`, reverse shells, `curl|bash`, `chmod 777`
- [ ] Consider adding custom patterns for project-specific dangerous commands

### MCP Tool (tools)
- [ ] Set `default_action: block` for high-security environments
- [ ] Explicitly allow only needed tools
- [ ] Use `require_confirmation` for write/execute tools
- [ ] Block dangerous tools: `shell_exec`, `eval`

### Prompt Injection (detection)
- [ ] Enable for agent-facing deployments
- [ ] Set `block_at_or_above: high` at minimum
- [ ] Set `warn_at_or_above: suspicious` for visibility

### Jailbreak (detection)
- [ ] Enable for user-facing deployments
- [ ] Set `block_threshold` to 40-50 for production
- [ ] Set `warn_threshold` to 15-20

### Patch Integrity (content)
- [ ] Set reasonable `max_additions` and `max_deletions` limits
- [ ] Enable `require_balance` for production
- [ ] Add `forbidden_patterns` for dangerous code changes

### Settings
- [ ] Set `session_timeout_secs` (1800 for production, 3600 for dev)
- [ ] Enable `verbose_logging` for audit compliance
- [ ] Consider `fail_fast: true` for high-security

## Policy Comparison

When tightening, always compare the before and after using `workbench_diff_policies` to verify:
- No unintended changes were introduced
- All intended tightening was applied
- No existing protections were accidentally removed

## Instructions

- Start by validating the current policy with `workbench_validate_policy`
- Provide exact YAML snippets for each recommended change
- Prioritize by risk: critical gaps first, then high, then medium
- Run scenarios before and after changes to verify improvements
- Use `workbench_diff_policies` to show before/after comparison
- Warn about false positives when tightening aggressively

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.