Auditing a dependency for supply-chain risk before install (pip/npm/go/cargo): checks typosquatting, maintainer/age risk, vulnerability DBs (OSV, GHSA, Socket), and lockfile hash pinning, then emits a risk score and approve/conditional/escalate/block decision. Use when adding or updating a dependency, reviewing a dependency PR, or investigating a compromise. Skip when no new dependency is involved or it is already vetted.
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add LerianStudio/ring --skill auditing-dependency-security --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Auditing Dependency Security?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/lerianstudio-auditing-dependency-security)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: ring:auditing-dependency-security
description: "Auditing a dependency for supply-chain risk before install (pip/npm/go/cargo): checks typosquatting, maintainer/age risk, vulnerability DBs (OSV, GHSA, Socket), and lockfile hash pinning, then emits a risk score and approve/conditional/escalate/block decision. Use when adding or updating a dependency, reviewing a dependency PR, or investigating a compromise. Skip when no new dependency is involved or it is already vetted."
---
# Dependency Security Check
## When to use
- Adding a new dependency to any project
- Running pip install, npm install, go get, or equivalent
- Auditing existing dependencies for supply-chain risk
- Reviewing a PR that adds or updates dependencies
- Investigating a potential supply-chain compromise
## Skip when
- No dependencies are being added, updated, or audited
- Task involves only internal code changes with no new imports
- Dependency is already vetted and pinned in lockfile
## Related
**Complementary:** ring:hardening-dockerfiles, ring:implementing-tasks
Supply-chain gate for every install command in a Lerian codebase.
## Pre-Install Checks
### 1. Package Identity Verification
```
For every package, verify:
├── Typosquatting: compare against known popular packages
│ e.g., "requets" vs "requests", "rnodule" vs "module"
├── Homoglyph attacks: look-alike Unicode characters
├── Maintainer risk:
│ - Single maintainer = higher risk
│ - Account age < 6 months = flag
│ - Recent ownership transfer = CRITICAL flag
└── Package age: < 30 days = flag
```
### 2. Vulnerability Database Check
| Source | Ecosystem | What It Covers |
|--------|-----------|----------------|
| OSV.dev | All | Google aggregated CVEs |
| GitHub Advisory Database | All | GHSA linked to CVEs |
| Socket.dev | npm, pip | Supply-chain: install scripts, network access |
| PyPI JSON API | pip | Metadata, maintainers, release history |
| npm registry API | npm | Metadata, maintainers, install scripts |
| Go vulnerability DB (vuln.go.dev) | Go | Official Go CVE database |
### 3. Behavioral Signals
| Signal | Risk Level | Description |
|--------|-----------|-------------|
| Install scripts | HIGH | `postinstall` (npm), `setup.py` subprocess |
| Network access at import | CRITICAL | Package phones home on import |
| File system access outside project | HIGH | Reads `~/.ssh`, `~/.aws`, env vars |
| Obfuscated code | CRITICAL | Base64 payloads, eval(), exec() |
| Native binary bundled | HIGH | Pre-compiled binaries without source |
### 4. Lockfile Integrity
| Ecosystem | Lockfile | Hash Requirement |
|-----------|----------|-----------------|
| Go | go.sum | SHA-256 native — Go handles automatically |
| npm | package-lock.json | `integrity` field (SHA-512) must be present for ALL deps |
| pip | requirements.txt | `--require-hashes` MUST be enforced |
| Cargo | Cargo.lock | `checksum` field verification |
## Risk Scoring
```
risk_score = weighted_sum(
typosquatting_similarity * 25,
maintainer_risk * 20,
package_age_risk * 15,
vulnerability_count * 20, # weighted by severity
behavioral_flags * 15,
lockfile_integrity * 5
)
```
Score thresholds:
- 0-25: LOW — proceed
- 26-50: MEDIUM — proceed with documentation
- 51-75: HIGH — escalate to Fred before installing
- 76-100: CRITICAL — block installation
## Decision Matrix
| Risk Level | Action |
|-----------|--------|
| LOW (0-25) | ✅ Approve — document in PR |
| MEDIUM (26-50) | ⚠️ Conditional — mitigations required |
| HIGH (51-75) | 🚨 Escalate to Fred before installing |
| CRITICAL (76-100) | ❌ Block — do not install |
## Report Template
```markdown
## Dependency Security Report
Package: {name} @ {version}
Ecosystem: {go|npm|pip}
Risk Score: {score}/100 — {LOW|MEDIUM|HIGH|CRITICAL}
### Verification Results
| Check | Status | Details |
|-------|--------|---------|
| Typosquatting check | PASS/FLAG | {comparison} |
| Maintainer verification | PASS/FLAG | {maintainer count, age} |
| Vulnerability scan | PASS/FLAG | {CVE count, severity} |
| Behavioral analysis | PASS/FLAG | {signals found} |
| Lockfile integrity | PASS/FAIL | {hash present/missing} |
### Decision
{APPROVED|CONDITIONAL|ESCALATE|BLOCKED}
### Required Actions (if not APPROVED)
1. {specific mitigations or alternatives}
```
## Mitigations for MEDIUM Risk
- Pin exact version in lockfile
- Vendor the dependency (copy source into repo)
- Document why this specific package was chosen over alternatives
- Add to security monitoring (e.g., GitHub Dependabot alerts)
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!