Evandro Fonseca Junior
bb3fe21766
The vendored SKILL.md files were byte-identical to upstream, but the playbooks, templates and schemas they reference were left behind in the original repos, so a loading skill pointed at a file that does not exist anywhere in this repository. Vendored 1:1 into each skill directory (so they survive `cp -r skills/* ~/.hermes/skills/`): - plays/ for api-security-review, code-review-security, sca-audit, secrets-scan, web-security-review (OWASP/secure-agent-playbook) - templates/finding.md for the four OWASP skills that cite it - schemas/finding.schema.json for cve-triage, patch-prioritization, dependency-scanning (UnitOneAI/SecuritySkills) - docs/sarif-output.md, docs/fixer-policy.md and docs/normalized-json-output.md for dependency-scanning Path fixes, the only edit to vendored text: - the three UnitOneAI skills referenced ../../../schemas/ and ../../../docs/ which assumed upstream's skills/<category>/<skill>/ depth; this repo is flat, so the links now resolve inside the skill directory - safedeps told the agent to run <skill_dir>/../../check_deps.py while the script is vendored next to SKILL.md; corrected to <skill_dir>/check_deps.py and documented the script's exit codes (1 = finding, not a crash) - NOTICE.md records the new files, the path edits, and the remaining known gaps (hermaguard's kensei-pipeline references, the ASVS dataset citations, and hermaguard being behind upstream) Verified: every backticked path in every SKILL.md now resolves; check_deps.py runs from the installed location and returns live OSV.dev data ([email protected] -> 2 advisories); hermaguard's 46 tests still pass.
2.9 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| safedeps | Grounds dependency decisions in live OSV.dev vulnerability data instead of a model's frozen training-cutoff knowledge. Trigger whenever you are about to add a dependency, bump/upgrade a package version, choose between package versions, answer "is <package> safe / vulnerable", or review a manifest or lockfile (requirements.txt, package.json, package-lock.json, go.mod) for security issues. Also trigger on requests like "check my dependencies for vulnerabilities" or "what version of X should I use". |
safedeps
Your training data has a cutoff. CVEs published after it are invisible to you, and a vulnerable package version doesn't error at runtime -- it just runs, quietly exploitable. Don't guess. Ask OSV.dev.
When to run this
Before you write a version number into a manifest, or when asked to review one, run the checker and use its real output instead of your own recollection of which versions are safe.
python3 <skill_dir>/check_deps.py <package>@<version>:<ecosystem>
python3 <skill_dir>/check_deps.py path/to/requirements.txt
(<skill_dir> is this file's directory; the script is vendored next to this
file, as check_deps.py. Ecosystems: npm, PyPI, Go, crates.io,
Maven, etc. -- omit :ecosystem and it defaults to npm.)
The script prints one of two things per package, straight from OSV.dev:
OK npm:[email protected] -- no known advisories
VULN npm:[email protected] -- 2 advisory(ies):
- CVE-2026-4800 [HIGH] lodash vulnerable to Code Injection via `_.template` imports key names
fix: upgrade to 4.18.0
What to do with the output
Exit code is 0 when every package is clean, 1 when at least one advisory
was found, and 2 when OSV.dev was unreachable -- 1 is a finding, not a
crash. (The manifest mode only accepts files named requirements.txt,
package.json, package-lock.json or go.mod.)
- If a package you're about to add/bump shows
VULN, do not use that version. Use the version named infix:instead (or newer). - If no fixed version is listed, tell the user there's an open advisory with no patch yet -- let them decide.
- Always surface the advisory IDs and severities to the user; don't silently swap versions without saying why.
- If the script reports OSV.dev is unreachable, say so plainly and fall back to your own knowledge with a caveat that it may be stale -- don't pretend you checked.
Examples
Adding a dependency: user asks to add flask to a Python project.
Run check_deps.py [email protected]:PyPI (the version you were about to pick)
before writing it to requirements.txt. If it's clean, proceed. If not,
check the fix: version and use that instead.
Reviewing a project: user asks "are my dependencies safe?" Run
check_deps.py requirements.txt (or package.json) in their project root
and report every VULN line with its fix version.