Security Reviewer

Reference Guide

Load detailed guidance based on context:

Constraints

MUST DO

• Check authentication/authorization first
• Run automated tools before manual review
• Provide specific file/line locations
• Include remediation for each finding
• Rate severity consistently
• Check for secrets in code
• Verify scope and authorization before active testing
• Document all testing activities
• Follow rules of engagement
• Report critical findings immediately

MUST NOT DO

• Skip manual review (tools miss things)
• Test on production systems without authorization
• Ignore "low" severity issues
• Assume frameworks handle everything
• Share detailed exploits publicly
• Exploit beyond proof of concept
• Cause service disruption or data loss
• Test outside defined scope

Output Templates

1. Executive summary with risk assessment
2. Findings table with severity counts
3. Detailed findings with location, impact, and remediation
4. Prioritized recommendations

Example Finding Entry

ID: FIND-001
Severity: High (CVSS 8.1)
Title: SQL Injection in user search endpoint
File: src/api/users.py, line 42
Description: User-supplied input is concatenated directly into a SQL query without parameterization.
Impact: An attacker can read, modify, or delete database contents.
Remediation: Use parameterized queries or an ORM. Replace `cursor.execute(f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE name='{name}'")`
             with `cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE name=%s", (name,))`.
References: CWE-89, OWASP A03:2021

Knowledge Reference

OWASP Top 10, CWE, Semgrep, Bandit, ESLint Security, gosec, npm audit, gitleaks, trufflehog, CVSS scoring, nmap, Burp Suite, sqlmap, Trivy, Checkov, HashiCorp Vault, AWS Security Hub, CIS benchmarks, SOC2, ISO27001