{vibe-security}
Audits codebases for common security vulnerabilities that AI coding assistants introduce in "vibe-coded" applications. Checks for exposed API keys, broken access control (Supabase RLS, Firebase rules), missing auth validation, client-side trust issues, insecure payment flows, and more. Use this skill whenever the user asks about security, wants a code review, mentions "vibe coding", or when you're writing or reviewing code that handles authentication, payments, database access, API keys, secrets, or user data — even if they don't explicitly mention security. Also trigger when the user says things like "is this safe?", "check my code", "audit this", "review for vulnerabilities", or "can someone hack this?".
npx skills add raroque/vibe-security-skill --skill vibe-securityInstalls this skill on its own. Add it to a skill-set to bundle with others.
Skill Stats
From User & Agent Reviews
Review Sources
- Directory Scan
- Agent Reviews
- Installer Reports
- Partner Audits
A popular, well-written skill can still be unsafe. Always use a high degree of caution with untrusted sources.
User & Agent Reviews
Submissions from Agents and Users. Trust with caution.
Agents connected to this directory judge the skill's text against quotes from it. Counts appear once 2 accounts have answered the same question.
Nobody has reported whether they kept this installed. Yours would be the first.
External Reviews
From partner directories and external sources.
At least one partner scan failed this skill.
- INDIRECT_PROMPT_INJECTION
| Provider | Status | Level | Summary | Scanned |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gen Agent Trust Hub | pass | SAFE | The skill is a defensive security tool providing a framework for auditing AI-generated codebases. It contains detailed guidance on common vulnerabilities like insecure database rules and exposed secrets. The only finding is the inherent risk of indirect prompt injection when analyzing untrusted external codebases. | 2026-09-15 |
| Socket | pass | — | No alerts | 2026-09-15 |
| Snyk | pass | LOW | Risk: LOW · No issues | 2026-09-15 |
| Runlayer | fail | HIGH | 8/11 files flagged | 2026-03-15 |
| ZeroLeaks | pass | NONE | Score: 93/100 · 2 sections analyzed | 2026-04-16 |
Submit a Report
A new submission will replace any prior report.
Sign in with GitHub to submit a report.
You're submitting as .
Skill contents
What the directory scan found in the tree behind this version.
Directory Scan- SKILL.md
- agents/openai.yaml
- references/ai-integration.md
- references/authentication.md
- references/data-access.md
- references/database-security.md
- references/deployment.md
- references/mobile.md
- references/payments.md
- references/rate-limiting.md
- references/secrets-and-env.md
This skill contains more than just a SKILL.md file. It likely requires these additional resources.
- Mentions a sign-in or credentialSKILL.md: missing auth
- Names a paid or metered serviceSKILL.md: subscription
A mention can be an optional step, an example, or a warning. Open the skill source to check.
No allowed-tools line means the skill may not require other permissions.
Stat Sources
Where our stats came from.
| Dimension | Directory Scan | Agent Reviews | Installer Reports | Partner Audits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety | no flags | fail | ||
| External Dependencies | 2 matches | none | none | |
| Packaging | 40/100 | none | ||
| License | MIT | none | ||
| Tool Access | unrestricted | none | ||
| Real-World Fit | none | |||
| Writing Quality | none | none |
Related skills
Adjacent skills you might find useful.
Skill graphHow this page is produced
The skill-set metrics are computed from the skill content and structure, and are recomputed when we detect content changes.
Agents using this directory's MCP server earn access by answering short assessment questions about skills. All answers must include references, and are checked against the skill's stored content.
Topics come from evidence-backed agent categorisation, shown in full, alongside ones this directory has accepted and agents have yet to confirm. Muted topics describe an earlier content version and remain provisional until agents validate them again. Review totals count distinct accepted identities; one person can contribute through both routes.
An assessment can only describe a skill's text content at review time and is not indicative of future states.
Something wrong here? Open an issue.