Skip to content
Back to skills

Web Exploit Prover

ASecurity

Deepen preliminary web findings into validated exploit impact using independent confirmation and confidence grading.

  • 2 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added October 17, 2026
testingtestingsecurity

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned October 17, 2026

npx -y skills add NetVar1337/agent-skill-canon --skill web-exploit-prover --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Web Exploit Prover?

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

Security grade badge for Web Exploit Prover
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/netvar1337-web-exploit-prover/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/netvar1337-web-exploit-prover)

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
---
name: web-exploit-prover
description: Deepen preliminary web findings into validated exploit impact using independent confirmation and confidence grading.
---

# Web Exploit Prover

## Purpose
Convert initial web vulnerability leads into high-confidence exploit outcomes.

## Inputs
- `initial_findings`
- `target_context`
- `auth_and_role_data`
- `environment_constraints`

## Evidence Levels
- `L1`: suspicious behavior only
- `L2`: exploit primitive observed
- `L3`: code path executed in attacker-controlled way
- `L4`: business impact demonstrated

## Workflow
### Phase 1: Independent Reproduction
1. Reproduce lead with alternate technique.
2. Validate preconditions and dependencies.
3. Confirm baseline-control difference.

### Phase 2: Impact Demonstration
1. Move from primitive to measurable impact.
2. Demonstrate confidentiality, integrity, or authorization breach.
3. Capture minimal proof with clear stop condition.

### Phase 3: Robustness Testing
1. Re-test across fresh session and role context.
2. Re-test with slight payload and transport changes.
3. Downgrade confidence on instability.

### Phase 4: Final Classification
1. `confirmed` when L3+ is reproducible.
2. `plausible` when primitive exists but impact blocked.
3. `disputed` when mitigation is proven.
4. `inconclusive` when environmental blockers remain.

## Output Contract
```json
{
  "confirmed_exploits": [],
  "plausible_findings": [],
  "disputed_findings": [],
  "inconclusive_findings": [],
  "impact_evidence": []
}
```

## Constraints
- No severity inflation from weak indicators.
- Distinguish security mitigation from test-environment failure.

## Quality Checklist
- [ ] Impact, not just signal, is demonstrated.
- [ ] Confirmation uses independent method.
- [ ] Confidence aligns with stability.

## Detailed Operator Notes
### Evidence Ladder
- Step 1: suspicious signal.
- Step 2: primitive confirmation.
- Step 3: execution/authorization breach.
- Step 4: concrete business impact.

### Variant Discipline
- Keep payload families grouped by hypothesis.
- Stop variant expansion when new runs are non-informative.
- Prefer context-correct payloads over generic sprays.

### Confounder Controls
- Re-test in a fresh session and new object state.
- Re-test with baseline payload and expected-secure payload.
- Confirm that edge cache/CDN behavior is not driving the result.

### Reporting Rules
- Include case-level timeline from trigger to impact.
- Include exploitation preconditions and limitations.
- Include clean retest steps for independent validation.

## Quick Scenarios
### Scenario A: Authorization Drift
- Baseline with owned resource.
- Replay with foreign resource identifier.
- Repeat with role shift and fresh session.
- Confirm read/write/delete differences.

### Scenario B: Input Handling Weakness
- Send syntactically valid control payload.
- Send semantically malicious variant.
- Verify parser or execution side effect.
- Re-test with content-type variation.

### Scenario C: Workflow Bypass
- Execute expected state sequence.
- Attempt out-of-order transition.
- Attempt repeated action replay.
- Confirm server-side state enforcement.

## Conditional Decision Matrix
| Condition | Action | Evidence Requirement |
|---|---|---|
| Finding signal unstable | downgrade confidence and add retest plan | repeated run variance log |
| Chain link missing prerequisite | split chain and mark dependency blocker | prerequisite graph |
| Impact appears low in isolation | evaluate chain amplification paths | chain-level impact narrative |
| Mitigation claim is partial | verify alternate path and state variants | mitigation bypass check |
| Environment blocker dominates | classify inconclusive with unblock requests | blocker evidence |

## Advanced Coverage Extensions
1. Add attack-path branching for multiple privilege starting points.
2. Add defender-detection assumptions and likely monitoring signals.
3. Add rollback/cleanup verification after proof steps.
4. Add business-impact mapping to concrete assets and workflows.
5. Add reproducibility score based on run-to-run consistency.

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.