Source profileQuality 91/100Review permissions

github/awesome-copilot/skills/agent-owasp-compliance/SKILL.md

agent-owasp-compliance

Check any AI agent codebase against the OWASP Agentic Security Initiative (ASI) Top 10 risks. Use this skill when: - Evaluating an agent system's security posture before production deployment - Running a compliance check against OWASP ASI 2026 standards - Mapping existing security controls to the 10 agentic risks - Generating a compliance report for security review or audit - Comparing agent framework security features against the standard - Any request like "is my agent OWASP compliant?", "chec

Source repository stars
37,126
Declared platforms
0
Static risk flags
1
Last source update
2026-07-28
Source checked
2026-07-28

Decision brief

What it does—and where it fits

Evaluate AI agent systems against the OWASP Agentic Security Initiative (ASI) Top 10 — the industry standard for agent security posture.

Best for

  • Use this skill when: - Evaluating an agent system's security posture before production deployment - Running a compliance check against OWASP ASI 2026 standards - Mapping existing security controls to the 10 agentic risk…

Not for

  • Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
  • Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.

Compatibility matrix

Platform support, with evidence labels

PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
CodexNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Claude CodeNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Open the compatibility checker

Installation

Inspect first. Install second.

The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

Source-detected install commandSource
npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill "skills/agent-owasp-compliance"
Safe inspection promptEditorial

Inspect the Agent Skill "agent-owasp-compliance" from https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot/blob/9933dcad5be5caeb288cebcd370eeeb2fc2f1685/skills/agent-owasp-compliance/SKILL.md at commit 9933dcad5be5caeb288cebcd370eeeb2fc2f1685. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

Workflow

What the source asks the agent to do

  1. 01

    Quick Assessment Questions

    Use these to rapidly assess an agent system:

    Does user input pass through validation before reaching any tool? (ASI-01)Is there an explicit list of what tools the agent can call? (ASI-02)Can the agent do anything, or are its capabilities bounded? (ASI-03)
  2. 02

    The 10 Risks

    Review the “The 10 Risks” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “The 10 Risks” source section.
  3. 03

    Check ASI-01: Prompt Injection Protection

    Look for input validation that runs before tool execution, not after LLM generation.

    Look for input validation that runs before tool execution, not after LLM generation.What passing looks like: python
  4. 04

    GOOD: Validate before tool execution

    result = policyengine.evaluate(userinput) if result.action == "deny": return "Request blocked by policy" toolresult = await executetool(validatedinput) python

    result = policyengine.evaluate(userinput) if result.action == "deny": return "Request blocked by policy" toolresult = await executetool(validatedinput) python
  5. 05

    BAD: User input goes directly to tool

    toolresult = await executetool(userinput) No validation python ALLOWEDTOOLS = {"search", "readfile", "createticket"}

    toolresult = await executetool(userinput) No validation python ALLOWEDTOOLS = {"search", "readfile", "createticket"}def executetool(name: str, args: dict): if name not in ALLOWEDTOOLS: raise PermissionError(f"Tool '{name}' not in allowlist") validate args... return toolsname python def accepttask(senderid: str, task: dict): trust = t…

Permission review

Static risk signals and limitations

Runs scripts

medium · line 57

The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.

r"eval\(", r"exec\(", r"subprocess\.run\(.*shell=True",

Runs scripts

medium · line 112

The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.

No `subprocess.run(shell=True)` with user-controlled input

Evidence record

Why each signal appears

EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
Quality score91/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
Repository stars37,126SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
Compatibility0 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

Pinned source

Provenance and original SKILL.md

Repository
github/awesome-copilot
Skill path
skills/agent-owasp-compliance/SKILL.md
Commit
9933dcad5be5caeb288cebcd370eeeb2fc2f1685
License
MIT
Collected
2026-07-28
Default branch
main
View the original SKILL.md

Agent OWASP ASI Compliance Check

Evaluate AI agent systems against the OWASP Agentic Security Initiative (ASI) Top 10 — the industry standard for agent security posture.

Overview

The OWASP ASI Top 10 defines the critical security risks specific to autonomous AI agents — not LLMs, not chatbots, but agents that call tools, access systems, and act on behalf of users. This skill checks whether your agent implementation addresses each risk.

Codebase → Scan for each ASI control:
  ASI-01: Prompt Injection Protection
  ASI-02: Tool Use Governance
  ASI-03: Agency Boundaries
  ASI-04: Escalation Controls
  ASI-05: Trust Boundary Enforcement
  ASI-06: Logging & Audit
  ASI-07: Identity Management
  ASI-08: Policy Integrity
  ASI-09: Supply Chain Verification
  ASI-10: Behavioral Monitoring
→ Generate Compliance Report (X/10 covered)

The 10 Risks

RiskNameWhat to Look For
ASI-01Prompt InjectionInput validation before tool calls, not just LLM output filtering
ASI-02Insecure Tool UseTool allowlists, argument validation, no raw shell execution
ASI-03Excessive AgencyCapability boundaries, scope limits, principle of least privilege
ASI-04Unauthorized EscalationPrivilege checks before sensitive operations, no self-promotion
ASI-05Trust Boundary ViolationTrust verification between agents, signed credentials, no blind trust
ASI-06Insufficient LoggingStructured audit trail for all tool calls, tamper-evident logs
ASI-07Insecure IdentityCryptographic agent identity, not just string names
ASI-08Policy BypassDeterministic policy enforcement, no LLM-based permission checks
ASI-09Supply Chain IntegritySigned plugins/tools, integrity verification, dependency auditing
ASI-10Behavioral AnomalyDrift detection, circuit breakers, kill switch capability

Check ASI-01: Prompt Injection Protection

Look for input validation that runs before tool execution, not after LLM generation.

import re
from pathlib import Path

def check_asi_01(project_path: str) -> dict:
    """ASI-01: Is user input validated before reaching tool execution?"""
    positive_patterns = [
        "input_validation", "validate_input", "sanitize",
        "classify_intent", "prompt_injection", "threat_detect",
        "PolicyEvaluator", "PolicyEngine", "check_content",
    ]
    negative_patterns = [
        r"eval\(", r"exec\(", r"subprocess\.run\(.*shell=True",
        r"os\.system\(",
    ]

    # Scan Python files for signals
    root = Path(project_path)
    positive_matches = []
    negative_matches = []

    for py_file in root.rglob("*.py"):
        content = py_file.read_text(errors="ignore")
        for pattern in positive_patterns:
            if pattern in content:
                positive_matches.append(f"{py_file.name}: {pattern}")
        for pattern in negative_patterns:
            if re.search(pattern, content):
                negative_matches.append(f"{py_file.name}: {pattern}")

    positive_found = len(positive_matches) > 0
    negative_found = len(negative_matches) > 0

    return {
        "risk": "ASI-01",
        "name": "Prompt Injection",
        "status": "pass" if positive_found and not negative_found else "fail",
        "controls_found": positive_matches,
        "vulnerabilities": negative_matches,
        "recommendation": "Add input validation before tool execution, not just output filtering"
    }

What passing looks like:

# GOOD: Validate before tool execution
result = policy_engine.evaluate(user_input)
if result.action == "deny":
    return "Request blocked by policy"
tool_result = await execute_tool(validated_input)

What failing looks like:

# BAD: User input goes directly to tool
tool_result = await execute_tool(user_input)  # No validation

Check ASI-02: Insecure Tool Use

Verify tools have allowlists, argument validation, and no unrestricted execution.

What to search for:

  • Tool registration with explicit allowlists (not open-ended)
  • Argument validation before tool execution
  • No subprocess.run(shell=True) with user-controlled input
  • No eval() or exec() on agent-generated code without sandbox

Passing example:

ALLOWED_TOOLS = {"search", "read_file", "create_ticket"}

def execute_tool(name: str, args: dict):
    if name not in ALLOWED_TOOLS:
        raise PermissionError(f"Tool '{name}' not in allowlist")
    # validate args...
    return tools[name](**validated_args)

Check ASI-03: Excessive Agency

Verify agent capabilities are bounded — not open-ended.

What to search for:

  • Explicit capability lists or execution rings
  • Scope limits on what the agent can access
  • Principle of least privilege applied to tool access

Failing: Agent has access to all tools by default. Passing: Agent capabilities defined as a fixed allowlist, unknown tools denied.


Check ASI-04: Unauthorized Escalation

Verify agents cannot promote their own privileges.

What to search for:

  • Privilege level checks before sensitive operations
  • No self-promotion patterns (agent changing its own trust score or role)
  • Escalation requires external attestation (human or SRE witness)

Failing: Agent can modify its own configuration or permissions. Passing: Privilege changes require out-of-band approval (e.g., Ring 0 requires SRE attestation).


Check ASI-05: Trust Boundary Violation

In multi-agent systems, verify that agents verify each other's identity before accepting instructions.

What to search for:

  • Agent identity verification (DIDs, signed tokens, API keys)
  • Trust score checks before accepting delegated tasks
  • No blind trust of inter-agent messages
  • Delegation narrowing (child scope <= parent scope)

Passing example:

def accept_task(sender_id: str, task: dict):
    trust = trust_registry.get_trust(sender_id)
    if not trust.meets_threshold(0.7):
        raise PermissionError(f"Agent {sender_id} trust too low: {trust.current()}")
    if not verify_signature(task, sender_id):
        raise SecurityError("Task signature verification failed")
    return process_task(task)

Check ASI-06: Insufficient Logging

Verify all agent actions produce structured, tamper-evident audit entries.

What to search for:

  • Structured logging for every tool call (not just print statements)
  • Audit entries include: timestamp, agent ID, tool name, args, result, policy decision
  • Append-only or hash-chained log format
  • Logs stored separately from agent-writable directories

Failing: Agent actions logged via print() or not logged at all. Passing: Structured JSONL audit trail with chain hashes, exported to secure storage.


Check ASI-07: Insecure Identity

Verify agents have cryptographic identity, not just string names.

Failing indicators:

  • Agent identified by agent_name = "my-agent" (string only)
  • No authentication between agents
  • Shared credentials across agents

Passing indicators:

  • DID-based identity (did:web:, did:key:)
  • Ed25519 or similar cryptographic signing
  • Per-agent credentials with rotation
  • Identity bound to specific capabilities

Check ASI-08: Policy Bypass

Verify policy enforcement is deterministic — not LLM-based.

What to search for:

  • Policy evaluation uses deterministic logic (YAML rules, code predicates)
  • No LLM calls in the enforcement path
  • Policy checks cannot be skipped or overridden by the agent
  • Fail-closed behavior (if policy check errors, action is denied)

Failing: Agent decides its own permissions via prompt ("Am I allowed to...?"). Passing: PolicyEvaluator.evaluate() returns allow/deny in <0.1ms, no LLM involved.


Check ASI-09: Supply Chain Integrity

Verify agent plugins and tools have integrity verification.

What to search for:

  • INTEGRITY.json or manifest files with SHA-256 hashes
  • Signature verification on plugin installation
  • Dependency pinning (no @latest, >= without upper bound)
  • SBOM generation

Check ASI-10: Behavioral Anomaly

Verify the system can detect and respond to agent behavioral drift.

What to search for:

  • Circuit breakers that trip on repeated failures
  • Trust score decay over time (temporal decay)
  • Kill switch or emergency stop capability
  • Anomaly detection on tool call patterns (frequency, targets, timing)

Failing: No mechanism to stop a misbehaving agent automatically. Passing: Circuit breaker trips after N failures, trust decays without activity, kill switch available.


Compliance Report Format

# OWASP ASI Compliance Report
Generated: 2026-04-01
Project: my-agent-system

## Summary: 7/10 Controls Covered

| Risk | Status | Finding |
|------|--------|---------|
| ASI-01 Prompt Injection | PASS | PolicyEngine validates input before tool calls |
| ASI-02 Insecure Tool Use | PASS | Tool allowlist enforced in governance.py |
| ASI-03 Excessive Agency | PASS | Execution rings limit capabilities |
| ASI-04 Unauthorized Escalation | PASS | Ring promotion requires attestation |
| ASI-05 Trust Boundary | FAIL | No identity verification between agents |
| ASI-06 Insufficient Logging | PASS | AuditChain with SHA-256 chain hashes |
| ASI-07 Insecure Identity | FAIL | Agents use string names, no crypto identity |
| ASI-08 Policy Bypass | PASS | Deterministic PolicyEvaluator, no LLM in path |
| ASI-09 Supply Chain | FAIL | No integrity manifests or plugin signing |
| ASI-10 Behavioral Anomaly | PASS | Circuit breakers and trust decay active |

## Critical Gaps
- ASI-05: Add agent identity verification using DIDs or signed tokens
- ASI-07: Replace string agent names with cryptographic identity
- ASI-09: Generate INTEGRITY.json manifests for all plugins

## Recommendation
Install agent-governance-toolkit for reference implementations of all 10 controls:
pip install agent-governance-toolkit

Quick Assessment Questions

Use these to rapidly assess an agent system:

  1. Does user input pass through validation before reaching any tool? (ASI-01)
  2. Is there an explicit list of what tools the agent can call? (ASI-02)
  3. Can the agent do anything, or are its capabilities bounded? (ASI-03)
  4. Can the agent promote its own privileges? (ASI-04)
  5. Do agents verify each other's identity before accepting tasks? (ASI-05)
  6. Is every tool call logged with enough detail to replay it? (ASI-06)
  7. Does each agent have a unique cryptographic identity? (ASI-07)
  8. Is policy enforcement deterministic (not LLM-based)? (ASI-08)
  9. Are plugins/tools integrity-verified before use? (ASI-09)
  10. Is there a circuit breaker or kill switch? (ASI-10)

If you answer "no" to any of these, that's a gap to address.


Related Resources

Alternatives

Compare before choosing

Computed 9737,126

github/awesome-copilot

geofeed-tuner

Use this skill whenever the user mentions IP geolocation feeds, RFC 8805, geofeeds, or wants help creating, tuning, validating, or publishing a self-published IP geolocation feed in CSV format. Intended user audience is a network operator, ISP, mobile carrier, cloud provider, hosting company, IXP, or satellite provider asking about IP geolocation accuracy, or geofeed authoring best practices. Helps create, refine, and improve CSV-format IP geolocation feeds with opinionated recommendations beyon

Computed 9531,966

K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills

simpy

Build, inspect, test, and analyze bounded process-based discrete-event simulations with SimPy, including events, resources, interrupts, monitoring, replications, warm-up, and reproducible output analysis.

Computed 9337,126

github/awesome-copilot

mcp-implementation-security-review

Review the implementation source code of MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers, clients, and tool handlers against a security baseline — authentication, sessions, rate limiting, input-schema validation, official-SDK usage, RCE vectors, and the OWASP MCP Top 10 — producing a report with file/line evidence. Use this skill when: - Reviewing an MCP server implementation for security before release - Checking a server against the baseline controls (MCP-01 to MCP-05) and the OWASP MCP Top 10 - Auditing

Computed 9237,126

github/awesome-copilot

github-release

Guides IA through releasing a new version of a GitHub library end-to-end. Handles SemVer versioning and Keep a Changelog formatting automatically.