Security review of Go code — dangerous sinks and web-framework pitfalls. Load when reviewing a Go codebase/PR, on .go source in scope, or "review this Go". Signals: go.mod, net/http, os/exec, text/template, database/sql, gin/echo/fiber.
Scanned 9/22/2026
npx -y skills add NoorQureshi/SploitAgent --skill code-review-go --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Code Review Go?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/noorqureshi-code-review-go)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.
---
name: code-review-go
description: >
Security review of Go code — dangerous sinks and web-framework pitfalls. Load when reviewing a Go
codebase/PR, on .go source in scope, or "review this Go". Signals: go.mod, net/http, os/exec,
text/template, database/sql, gin/echo/fiber.
domain: code-review
type: reference
stability: learning
modes: [bugbounty, defense, pentest]
severity: info
cwe: [CWE-78, CWE-89, CWE-79, CWE-22, CWE-918]
tools: [gosec, semgrep, govulncheck, ripgrep]
schema_version: 1
---
# Go source review
## When it applies
Reviewing Go source (an API, a CLI, a microservice). Go is memory-safe, so the bugs are logic and
injection: command exec, the wrong template package, string-built SQL, and path/SSRF handling.
## Why it works
Go's stdlib gives a safe and an unsafe option side by side (`html/template` vs `text/template`;
parameterised `db.Query(?, x)` vs `fmt.Sprintf` into a query). Reviews find code that reached for the
unsafe one, or that shells out with `sh -c`.
## Sinks & patterns (grep, then trace to user input)
- **Command exec**: `exec.Command("sh","-c", …)` / `exec.CommandContext` with concatenated input
(safe form passes args separately — flag the `sh -c` variant).
- **XSS**: `text/template` used to render HTML (no auto-escaping); manual `w.Write([]byte(userHTML))`.
- **SQLi**: `fmt.Sprintf`/string concat into `db.Query`/`db.Exec` instead of placeholders.
- **Path traversal**: `filepath.Join(base, userInput)` without `filepath.Clean` + prefix check;
`http.ServeFile` with user paths.
- **SSRF**: `http.Get`/`http.NewRequest` on user-supplied URLs; missing host allowlist.
- **Other**: `text/template`/`html/template` injection from user-controlled template strings,
unvalidated `Unmarshal` into structs (mass assignment), `unsafe` pointer use, weak `math/rand`
for tokens (use `crypto/rand`).
## Framework specifics
- **gin/echo/fiber**: `c.Param`/`c.Query`/`c.Bind` sources; check bound structs for mass assignment
and missing auth middleware on state-changing routes.
- **Templates**: confirm `html/template` (not `text/template`) for anything rendered to a browser.
## Method
1. Run `gosec` and `govulncheck` for a first pass; treat as leads, not verdicts.
2. `rg 'exec.Command|text/template|Sprintf.*Query|filepath.Join'` and trace to request input.
3. Check auth/authorization middleware coverage on each route group.
4. Confirm exploitable classes with the matching runtime skill.
## Gotchas
- `exec.Command(name, arg1, arg2)` (no shell) is safe — only the `sh -c "...user..."` form injects.
- `html/template` context-escapes; the bug is usually using `text/template` by mistake.
- Errors ignored with `_` can hide security-relevant failures (e.g. an auth check's error).
## References
Go security best practices; `gosec` rule set; OWASP Go SCP; `govulncheck` (known-vuln deps).
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!