@cubis/foundry 0.3.11 → 0.3.13

package/Ai Agent Workflow/powers/vulnerability-scanner/SKILL.md

@@ -1,11 +1,276 @@
 ---
 name: vulnerability-scanner
 description: Advanced vulnerability analysis principles. OWASP 2025, Supply Chain Security, attack surface mapping, risk prioritization.
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Bash
 ---
 
-# vulnerability-scanner
+# Vulnerability Scanner
 
-This power mirrors the base skill:
-- `Ai Agent Workflow/skills/vulnerability-scanner/SKILL.md`
+> Think like an attacker, defend like an expert. 2025 threat landscape awareness.
 
-When both exist, prefer the base skill as source of truth unless power-specific overrides are added here.
+## 🔧 Runtime Scripts
+
+**Execute for automated validation:**
+
+| Script | Purpose | Usage |
+|--------|---------|-------|
+| `scripts/security_scan.py` | Validate security principles applied | `python scripts/security_scan.py <project_path>` |
+
+## 📋 Reference Files
+
+| File | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| [checklists.md](checklists.md) | OWASP Top 10, Auth, API, Data protection checklists |
+
+---
+
+## 1. Security Expert Mindset
+
+### Core Principles
+
+| Principle | Application |
+|-----------|-------------|
+| **Assume Breach** | Design as if attacker already inside |
+| **Zero Trust** | Never trust, always verify |
+| **Defense in Depth** | Multiple layers, no single point |
+| **Least Privilege** | Minimum required access only |
+| **Fail Secure** | On error, deny access |
+
+### Threat Modeling Questions
+
+Before scanning, ask:
+1. What are we protecting? (Assets)
+2. Who would attack? (Threat actors)
+3. How would they attack? (Attack vectors)
+4. What's the impact? (Business risk)
+
+---
+
+## 2. OWASP Top 10:2025
+
+### Risk Categories
+
+| Rank | Category | Think About |
+|------|----------|-------------|
+| **A01** | Broken Access Control | Who can access what? IDOR, SSRF |
+| **A02** | Security Misconfiguration | Defaults, headers, exposed services |
+| **A03** | Software Supply Chain 🆕 | Dependencies, CI/CD, build integrity |
+| **A04** | Cryptographic Failures | Weak crypto, exposed secrets |
+| **A05** | Injection | User input → system commands |
+| **A06** | Insecure Design | Flawed architecture |
+| **A07** | Authentication Failures | Session, credential management |
+| **A08** | Integrity Failures | Unsigned updates, tampered data |
+| **A09** | Logging & Alerting | Blind spots, no monitoring |
+| **A10** | Exceptional Conditions 🆕 | Error handling, fail-open states |
+
+### 2025 Key Changes
+
+```
+2021 → 2025 Shifts:
+├── SSRF merged into A01 (Access Control)
+├── A02 elevated (Cloud/Container configs)
+├── A03 NEW: Supply Chain (major focus)
+├── A10 NEW: Exceptional Conditions
+└── Focus shift: Root causes > Symptoms
+```
+
+---
+
+## 3. Supply Chain Security (A03)
+
+### Attack Surface
+
+| Vector | Risk | Question to Ask |
+|--------|------|-----------------|
+| **Dependencies** | Malicious packages | Do we audit new deps? |
+| **Lock files** | Integrity attacks | Are they committed? |
+| **Build pipeline** | CI/CD compromise | Who can modify? |
+| **Registry** | Typosquatting | Verified sources? |
+
+### Defense Principles
+
+- Verify package integrity (checksums)
+- Pin versions, audit updates
+- Use private registries for critical deps
+- Sign and verify artifacts
+
+---
+
+## 4. Attack Surface Mapping
+
+### What to Map
+
+| Category | Elements |
+|----------|----------|
+| **Entry Points** | APIs, forms, file uploads |
+| **Data Flows** | Input → Process → Output |
+| **Trust Boundaries** | Where auth/authz checked |
+| **Assets** | Secrets, PII, business data |
+
+### Prioritization Matrix
+
+```
+Risk = Likelihood × Impact
+
+High Impact + High Likelihood → CRITICAL
+High Impact + Low Likelihood  → HIGH
+Low Impact + High Likelihood  → MEDIUM
+Low Impact + Low Likelihood   → LOW
+```
+
+---
+
+## 5. Risk Prioritization
+
+### CVSS + Context
+
+| Factor | Weight | Question |
+|--------|--------|----------|
+| **CVSS Score** | Base severity | How severe is the vuln? |
+| **EPSS Score** | Exploit likelihood | Is it being exploited? |
+| **Asset Value** | Business context | What's at risk? |
+| **Exposure** | Attack surface | Internet-facing? |
+
+### Prioritization Decision Tree
+
+```
+Is it actively exploited (EPSS >0.5)?
+├── YES → CRITICAL: Immediate action
+└── NO → Check CVSS
+         ├── CVSS ≥9.0 → HIGH
+         ├── CVSS 7.0-8.9 → Consider asset value
+         └── CVSS <7.0 → Schedule for later
+```
+
+---
+
+## 6. Exceptional Conditions (A10 - New)
+
+### Fail-Open vs Fail-Closed
+
+| Scenario | Fail-Open (BAD) | Fail-Closed (GOOD) |
+|----------|-----------------|---------------------|
+| Auth error | Allow access | Deny access |
+| Parsing fails | Accept input | Reject input |
+| Timeout | Retry forever | Limit + abort |
+
+### What to Check
+
+- Exception handlers that catch-all and ignore
+- Missing error handling on security operations
+- Race conditions in auth/authz
+- Resource exhaustion scenarios
+
+---
+
+## 7. Scanning Methodology
+
+### Phase-Based Approach
+
+```
+1. RECONNAISSANCE
+   └── Understand the target
+       ├── Technology stack
+       ├── Entry points
+       └── Data flows
+
+2. DISCOVERY
+   └── Identify potential issues
+       ├── Configuration review
+       ├── Dependency analysis
+       └── Code pattern search
+
+3. ANALYSIS
+   └── Validate and prioritize
+       ├── False positive elimination
+       ├── Risk scoring
+       └── Attack chain mapping
+
+4. REPORTING
+   └── Actionable findings
+       ├── Clear reproduction steps
+       ├── Business impact
+       └── Remediation guidance
+```
+
+---
+
+## 8. Code Pattern Analysis
+
+### High-Risk Patterns
+
+| Pattern | Risk | Look For |
+|---------|------|----------|
+| **String concat in queries** | Injection | `"SELECT * FROM " + user_input` |
+| **Dynamic code execution** | RCE | `eval()`, `exec()`, `Function()` |
+| **Unsafe deserialization** | RCE | `pickle.loads()`, `unserialize()` |
+| **Path manipulation** | Traversal | User input in file paths |
+| **Disabled security** | Various | `verify=False`, `--insecure` |
+
+### Secret Patterns
+
+| Type | Indicators |
+|------|-----------|
+| API Keys | `api_key`, `apikey`, high entropy |
+| Tokens | `token`, `bearer`, `jwt` |
+| Credentials | `password`, `secret`, `key` |
+| Cloud | `AWS_`, `AZURE_`, `GCP_` prefixes |
+
+---
+
+## 9. Cloud Security Considerations
+
+### Shared Responsibility
+
+| Layer | You Own | Provider Owns |
+|-------|---------|---------------|
+| Data | ✅ | ❌ |
+| Application | ✅ | ❌ |
+| OS/Runtime | Depends | Depends |
+| Infrastructure | ❌ | ✅ |
+
+### Cloud-Specific Checks
+
+- IAM: Least privilege applied?
+- Storage: Public buckets?
+- Network: Security groups tightened?
+- Secrets: Using secrets manager?
+
+---
+
+## 10. Anti-Patterns
+
+| ❌ Don't | ✅ Do |
+|----------|-------|
+| Scan without understanding | Map attack surface first |
+| Alert on every CVE | Prioritize by exploitability + asset |
+| Ignore false positives | Maintain verified baseline |
+| Fix symptoms only | Address root causes |
+| Scan once before deploy | Continuous scanning |
+| Trust third-party deps blindly | Verify integrity, audit code |
+
+---
+
+## 11. Reporting Principles
+
+### Finding Structure
+
+Each finding should answer:
+1. **What?** - Clear vulnerability description
+2. **Where?** - Exact location (file, line, endpoint)
+3. **Why?** - Root cause explanation
+4. **Impact?** - Business consequence
+5. **How to fix?** - Specific remediation
+
+### Severity Classification
+
+| Severity | Criteria |
+|----------|----------|
+| **Critical** | RCE, auth bypass, mass data exposure |
+| **High** | Data exposure, privilege escalation |
+| **Medium** | Limited scope, requires conditions |
+| **Low** | Informational, best practice |
+
+---
+
+> **Remember:** Vulnerability scanning finds issues. Expert thinking prioritizes what matters. Always ask: "What would an attacker do with this?"

package/Ai Agent Workflow/powers/web-design-guidelines/POWER.md

@@ -1,13 +1,60 @@
+````markdown
 ---
+inclusion: manual
 name: web-design-guidelines
 description: Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
+metadata:
+  author: vercel
+  version: "1.0.0"
+  argument-hint: <file-or-pattern>
 ---
 
-# web-design-guidelines
+# Web Interface Guidelines
 
-This is a compatibility power wrapper for the `web-design-guidelines` skill.
+Review files for compliance with Web Interface Guidelines.
 
-Primary source:
-- `Ai Agent Workflow/skills/web-design-guidelines/SKILL.md`
+## How It Works
 
-Use this folder for power-specific extensions when needed.
+1. Fetch the latest guidelines from the source URL below
+2. Read the specified files (or prompt user for files/pattern)
+3. Check against all rules in the fetched guidelines
+4. Output findings in the terse `file:line` format
+
+## Guidelines Source
+
+Fetch fresh guidelines before each review:
+
+```
+https://raw.githubusercontent.com/vercel-labs/web-interface-guidelines/main/command.md
+```
+
+Use WebFetch to retrieve the latest rules. The fetched content contains all the rules and output format instructions.
+
+## Usage
+
+When a user provides a file or pattern argument:
+1. Fetch guidelines from the source URL above
+2. Read the specified files
+3. Apply all rules from the fetched guidelines
+4. Output findings using the format specified in the guidelines
+
+If no files specified, ask the user which files to review.
+
+---
+
+## Related Skills
+
+| Skill | When to Use |
+|-------|-------------|
+| **[frontend-design](../frontend-design/SKILL.md)** | Before coding - Learn design principles (color, typography, UX psychology) |
+| **web-design-guidelines** (this) | After coding - Audit for accessibility, performance, and best practices |
+
+## Design Workflow
+
+```
+1. DESIGN   → Read frontend-design principles
+2. CODE     → Implement the design
+3. AUDIT    → Run web-design-guidelines review ← YOU ARE HERE
+4. FIX      → Address findings from audit
+```
+````

package/Ai Agent Workflow/powers/web-design-guidelines/SKILL.md

@@ -1,11 +1,57 @@
 ---
 name: web-design-guidelines
 description: Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
+metadata:
+  author: vercel
+  version: "1.0.0"
+  argument-hint: <file-or-pattern>
 ---
 
-# web-design-guidelines
+# Web Interface Guidelines
 
-This power mirrors the base skill:
-- `Ai Agent Workflow/skills/web-design-guidelines/SKILL.md`
+Review files for compliance with Web Interface Guidelines.
 
-When both exist, prefer the base skill as source of truth unless power-specific overrides are added here.
+## How It Works
+
+1. Fetch the latest guidelines from the source URL below
+2. Read the specified files (or prompt user for files/pattern)
+3. Check against all rules in the fetched guidelines
+4. Output findings in the terse `file:line` format
+
+## Guidelines Source
+
+Fetch fresh guidelines before each review:
+
+```
+https://raw.githubusercontent.com/vercel-labs/web-interface-guidelines/main/command.md
+```
+
+Use WebFetch to retrieve the latest rules. The fetched content contains all the rules and output format instructions.
+
+## Usage
+
+When a user provides a file or pattern argument:
+1. Fetch guidelines from the source URL above
+2. Read the specified files
+3. Apply all rules from the fetched guidelines
+4. Output findings using the format specified in the guidelines
+
+If no files specified, ask the user which files to review.
+
+---
+
+## Related Skills
+
+| Skill | When to Use |
+|-------|-------------|
+| **[frontend-design](../frontend-design/SKILL.md)** | Before coding - Learn design principles (color, typography, UX psychology) |
+| **web-design-guidelines** (this) | After coding - Audit for accessibility, performance, and best practices |
+
+## Design Workflow
+
+```
+1. DESIGN   → Read frontend-design principles
+2. CODE     → Implement the design
+3. AUDIT    → Run web-design-guidelines review ← YOU ARE HERE
+4. FIX      → Address findings from audit
+```

package/Ai Agent Workflow/powers/web-perf/POWER.md

@@ -0,0 +1,196 @@
+````markdown
+---
+inclusion: manual
+name: web-perf
+description: Analyzes web performance using Chrome DevTools MCP. Measures Core Web Vitals (FCP, LCP, TBT, CLS, Speed Index), identifies render-blocking resources, network dependency chains, layout shifts, caching issues, and accessibility gaps. Use when asked to audit, profile, debug, or optimize page load performance, Lighthouse scores, or site speed.
+---
+
+# Web Performance Audit
+
+Audit web page performance using Chrome DevTools MCP tools. This skill focuses on Core Web Vitals, network optimization, and high-level accessibility gaps.
+
+## FIRST: Verify MCP Tools Available
+
+**Run this before starting.** Try calling `navigate_page` or `performance_start_trace`. If unavailable, STOP—the chrome-devtools MCP server isn't configured.
+
+Ask the user to add this to their MCP config:
+
+```json
+"chrome-devtools": {
+  "type": "local",
+  "command": ["npx", "-y", "chrome-devtools-mcp@latest"]
+}
+```
+
+## Key Guidelines
+
+- **Be assertive**: Verify claims by checking network requests, DOM, or codebase—then state findings definitively.
+- **Verify before recommending**: Confirm something is unused before suggesting removal.
+- **Quantify impact**: Use estimated savings from insights. Don't prioritize changes with 0ms impact.
+- **Skip non-issues**: If render-blocking resources have 0ms estimated impact, note but don't recommend action.
+- **Be specific**: Say "compress hero.png (450KB) to WebP" not "optimize images".
+- **Prioritize ruthlessly**: A site with 200ms LCP and 0 CLS is already excellent—say so.
+
+## Quick Reference
+
+| Task | Tool Call |
+|------|-----------|
+| Load page | `navigate_page(url: "...")` |
+| Start trace | `performance_start_trace(autoStop: true, reload: true)` |
+| Analyze insight | `performance_analyze_insight(insightSetId: "...", insightName: "...")` |
+| List requests | `list_network_requests(resourceTypes: ["Script", "Stylesheet", ...])` |
+| Request details | `get_network_request(reqid: <id>)` |
+| A11y snapshot | `take_snapshot(verbose: true)` |
+
+## Workflow
+
+Copy this checklist to track progress:
+
+```
+Audit Progress:
+- [ ] Phase 1: Performance trace (navigate + record)
+- [ ] Phase 2: Core Web Vitals analysis (includes CLS culprits)
+- [ ] Phase 3: Network analysis
+- [ ] Phase 4: Accessibility snapshot
+- [ ] Phase 5: Codebase analysis (skip if third-party site)
+```
+
+### Phase 1: Performance Trace
+
+1. Navigate to the target URL:
+   ```
+   navigate_page(url: "<target-url>")
+   ```
+
+2. Start a performance trace with reload to capture cold-load metrics:
+   ```
+   performance_start_trace(autoStop: true, reload: true)
+   ```
+
+3. Wait for trace completion, then retrieve results.
+
+**Troubleshooting:**
+- If trace returns empty or fails, verify the page loaded correctly with `navigate_page` first
+- If insight names don't match, inspect the trace response to list available insights
+
+### Phase 2: Core Web Vitals Analysis
+
+Use `performance_analyze_insight` to extract key metrics.
+
+**Note:** Insight names may vary across Chrome DevTools versions. If an insight name doesn't work, check the `insightSetId` from the trace response to discover available insights.
+
+Common insight names:
+
+| Metric | Insight Name | What to Look For |
+|--------|--------------|------------------|
+| LCP | `LCPBreakdown` | Time to largest contentful paint; breakdown of TTFB, resource load, render delay |
+| CLS | `CLSCulprits` | Elements causing layout shifts (images without dimensions, injected content, font swaps) |
+| Render Blocking | `RenderBlocking` | CSS/JS blocking first paint |
+| Document Latency | `DocumentLatency` | Server response time issues |
+| Network Dependencies | `NetworkRequestsDepGraph` | Request chains delaying critical resources |
+
+Example:
+```
+performance_analyze_insight(insightSetId: "<id-from-trace>", insightName: "LCPBreakdown")
+```
+
+**Key thresholds (good/needs-improvement/poor):**
+- TTFB: < 800ms / < 1.8s / > 1.8s
+- FCP: < 1.8s / < 3s / > 3s
+- LCP: < 2.5s / < 4s / > 4s
+- INP: < 200ms / < 500ms / > 500ms
+- TBT: < 200ms / < 600ms / > 600ms
+- CLS: < 0.1 / < 0.25 / > 0.25
+- Speed Index: < 3.4s / < 5.8s / > 5.8s
+
+### Phase 3: Network Analysis
+
+List all network requests to identify optimization opportunities:
+```
+list_network_requests(resourceTypes: ["Script", "Stylesheet", "Document", "Font", "Image"])
+```
+
+**Look for:**
+
+1. **Render-blocking resources**: JS/CSS in `<head>` without `async`/`defer`/`media` attributes
+2. **Network chains**: Resources discovered late because they depend on other resources loading first (e.g., CSS imports, JS-loaded fonts)
+3. **Missing preloads**: Critical resources (fonts, hero images, key scripts) not preloaded
+4. **Caching issues**: Missing or weak `Cache-Control`, `ETag`, or `Last-Modified` headers
+5. **Large payloads**: Uncompressed or oversized JS/CSS bundles
+6. **Unused preconnects**: If flagged, verify by checking if ANY requests went to that origin. If zero requests, it's definitively unused—recommend removal. If requests exist but loaded late, the preconnect may still be valuable.
+
+For detailed request info:
+```
+get_network_request(reqid: <id>)
+```
+
+### Phase 4: Accessibility Snapshot
+
+Take an accessibility tree snapshot:
+```
+take_snapshot(verbose: true)
+```
+
+**Flag high-level gaps:**
+- Missing or duplicate ARIA IDs
+- Elements with poor contrast ratios (check against WCAG AA: 4.5:1 for normal text, 3:1 for large text)
+- Focus traps or missing focus indicators
+- Interactive elements without accessible names
+
+## Phase 5: Codebase Analysis
+
+**Skip if auditing a third-party site without codebase access.**
+
+Analyze the codebase to understand where improvements can be made.
+
+### Detect Framework & Bundler
+
+Search for configuration files to identify the stack:
+
+| Tool | Config Files |
+|------|--------------|
+| Webpack | `webpack.config.js`, `webpack.*.js` |
+| Vite | `vite.config.js`, `vite.config.ts` |
+| Rollup | `rollup.config.js`, `rollup.config.mjs` |
+| esbuild | `esbuild.config.js`, build scripts with `esbuild` |
+| Parcel | `.parcelrc`, `package.json` (parcel field) |
+| Next.js | `next.config.js`, `next.config.mjs` |
+| Nuxt | `nuxt.config.js`, `nuxt.config.ts` |
+| SvelteKit | `svelte.config.js` |
+| Astro | `astro.config.mjs` |
+
+Also check `package.json` for framework dependencies and build scripts.
+
+### Tree-Shaking & Dead Code
+
+- **Webpack**: Check for `mode: 'production'`, `sideEffects` in package.json, `usedExports` optimization
+- **Vite/Rollup**: Tree-shaking enabled by default; check for `treeshake` options
+- **Look for**: Barrel files (`index.js` re-exports), large utility libraries imported wholesale (lodash, moment)
+
+### Unused JS/CSS
+
+- Check for CSS-in-JS vs. static CSS extraction
+- Look for PurgeCSS/UnCSS configuration (Tailwind's `content` config)
+- Identify dynamic imports vs. eager loading
+
+### Polyfills
+
+- Check for `@babel/preset-env` targets and `useBuiltIns` setting
+- Look for `core-js` imports (often oversized)
+- Check `browserslist` config for overly broad targeting
+
+### Compression & Minification
+
+- Check for `terser`, `esbuild`, or `swc` minification
+- Look for gzip/brotli compression in build output or server config
+- Check for source maps in production builds (should be external or disabled)
+
+## Output Format
+
+Present findings as:
+
+1. **Core Web Vitals Summary** - Table with metric, value, and rating (good/needs-improvement/poor)
+2. **Top Issues** - Prioritized list of problems with estimated impact (high/medium/low)
+3. **Recommendations** - Specific, actionable fixes with code snippets or config changes
+4. **Codebase Findings** - Framework/bundler detected, optimization opportunities (omit if no codebase access)
+````