정보
이 스킬은 보안 패치를 원본 익스플로잇과 변종에 대해 테스트하여 회귀 현상을 일으키지 않으면서 취약점을 해결하는지 검증합니다. 패치 생성 후, 특히 AI 생성 또는 업스트림 수정 사항을 병합하기 전에 사용하도록 설계되었습니다. 이 검증 과정은 재현 가능한 실패 증거를 제공하며 모든 프로그래밍 언어에서의 동작 보존 여부를 확인합니다.
빠른 설치
Claude Code
추천npx skills add trailofbits/skills -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/trailofbits/skillsgit clone https://github.com/trailofbits/skills.git ~/.claude/skills/post-patch-validationClaude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요
문서
Post-Patch Validation
Validate a security patch against the reported bug and the surrounding code it affects. Give the patch author reproducible failures to fix and identify what still needs testing. Apply the same checks to human and agent patches. The diff, author, upstream implementation, and original proof of concept alone cannot establish correctness.
When to Use
- A security fix, remediation commit, patch file, or pull request already exists.
- An AI-generated patch needs validation before human review or merge.
- A fix may cover one exploit path while missing variants of the same root cause.
- A security fix may alter legitimate behavior or introduce a new vulnerability.
- A patch author needs concrete failures and coverage gaps before another revision.
When NOT to Use
- No patch exists yet; use vulnerability discovery or fix implementation first.
- The task is to review an audit finding against a report without executing patch evidence.
- The task is only to convert a finding into a permanent project test.
- The target is remote or production. This skill executes local code and tests only.
- The user has not authorized execution of the repository's code or test suite.
Quick Start
-
Pin the vulnerable base and patched input. Prefer immutable commits. For uncommitted work, create a binary patch file first; do not validate in the user's working tree.
-
Scaffold a pinned plan:
uv run {baseDir}/scripts/post_patch_validation.py scaffold \ --repo . \ --base-ref <vulnerable-ref> \ --patched-ref <patched-ref> \ --finding-id <stable-id> \ --finding-summary "<root cause and impact>" \ --evidence-level runtime \ --output post-patch-validation/plan.jsonUse
--patch-file <path>instead of--patched-reffor a patch artifact. Choose the highest honest evidence level:sourcefor source/patch invariants only,buildwhen target code is compiled or analyzed but the reported behavior is not executed, orruntimewhen the checks execute the reported behavior and its safety assertions. -
Inspect the finding, diff, callers, sibling paths, cleanup/error paths, and existing tests. Populate
checksin the generated plan. Runprint-schemafor the structural schema:uv run {baseDir}/scripts/post_patch_validation.py print-schema -
Run
validate-planfor the complete validation, including coverage, command restrictions, and pinned inputs, before executing code:uv run {baseDir}/scripts/post_patch_validation.py validate-plan \ --plan post-patch-validation/plan.json -
Execute the evidence plan:
uv run {baseDir}/scripts/post_patch_validation.py run \ --plan post-patch-validation/plan.json \ --output post-patch-validation/results -
Report
result.json,report.md, the evidence level, and the completeassessment. Return each finding to the patch author with its check ID, assertion, and saved logs. Identify each validation gap separately, including gaps that coexist with supported findings. After the author revises the patch, pin the new inputs and save a fresh validation run. Preserve the prior evidence. Passing supplied checks still requires human review before acceptance.
Evidence Contract
The runner rejects incomplete plans. Supply at least one check of every kind:
| Kind | Required observation |
|---|---|
control | Benign harness succeeds on both base and patch |
exploit | Original safety assertion fails on base and succeeds on patch |
variant | A distinct root-cause variant fails on base and succeeds on patch |
behavior | Unaffected behavior succeeds with byte-identical selected output |
regression | Targeted non-security regression check succeeds on both revisions |
security | Adjacent/new-vulnerability check succeeds on base and patch |
suite | Existing project suite, sanitizer, or deterministic fuzz campaign succeeds on patch |
Commands are argv arrays, never shell strings. Put complex setup in a checked-in or plan artifact
script and invoke it with {plan_dir}. The runner fixes locale/timezone/hash-seed inputs, executes
checks in lexical ID order, records raw stdout/stderr, and never edits the original worktree.
Each check's timeout_seconds defaults to 300 and accepts integers from 1 through 3600.
Exceeding the timeout leaves a validation gap. A timeout alone does not establish a regression.
Every plan also contains a sorted submodules array ([] when none). Scaffolding infers affected
Gitlinks from the changed-file inventory. The runner initializes those pinned commits from the
source repository's existing Git module objects, never from .gitmodules network URLs; initialize
or fetch them in the source repository before validation.
Exploit and variant checks must prove they ran
A nonzero exit does not mean the vulnerability reproduced. An import error, a failed build, a
missing dependency, and a failed safety assertion all exit nonzero and are indistinguishable to the
runner. Every exploit and variant check must print and flush PPV_REACHED immediately
before it evaluates its assertion, on both revisions:
"argv": ["python3", "-c", "import app; value = app.render('<'); print('PPV_REACHED', flush=True); assert value == '<'"]
The token is also in the environment as PPV_REACHED_MARKER. It must land on stdout, as a line
of its own. Stderr is not scanned, because a Python SyntaxError traceback echoes the offending
source and would otherwise satisfy the check for a harness that executed nothing. A run without it
leaves a marker_missing gap. Independent findings from other checks remain in the result.
Flush explicitly: a harness whose payload segfaults or calls _exit loses buffered output and forfeits its own evidence.
These checks also run side-blind. {side} is not expanded for them, PPV_SIDE is absent from
their environment, the checkout directory is randomly named, and the plan validator rejects any
exploit or variant check whose argv or env mentions either. An assertion that can see which
revision it is on can assert on that instead of on the code, which is the cheapest possible way
to fake a reproduction followed by a fix.
Environment
Checks run under a fixed minimal environment: PATH, HOME, and a handful of temp/user keys,
plus LANG/LC_ALL=C, TZ=UTC, PYTHONHASHSEED=0, NO_COLOR, TERM=dumb. Everything else in
the caller's environment is dropped. Toolchains that need more get it explicitly:
uv run {baseDir}/scripts/post_patch_validation.py run \
--plan post-patch-validation/plan.json \
--output post-patch-validation/results \
--allow-env JAVA_HOME --allow-env CARGO_HOME
Forwarded names and values are recorded in result.json. A requested variable that is unset is an
error, not an empty string. Two classes are refused outright: names that read as credentials
(*SECRET*, *TOKEN*, *API_KEY*, …), because the value would be written into the result; and
names that change what executes (LD_PRELOAD, BASH_ENV, NODE_OPTIONS, GIT_SSH_COMMAND, …),
because those variables can change which code executes.
The runner's fixed variables and every PPV_* name are also reserved and cannot be forwarded.
Placeholders expanded in argv and per-check env values: {checkout} (the revision under test),
{plan_dir} (an isolated copy of the plan artifacts for that one invocation), {scratch} (a
fresh opaque directory for that one check invocation), and
{side} (base or patched, and not available to exploit/variant checks). The same values
arrive as PPV_CHECKOUT, PPV_PLAN_DIR, PPV_SCRATCH, PPV_SIDE, and PPV_CASE_ID. Write only
under {scratch}; the evidence directory path is not passed to checks. Base and patched invocations
do not share runner-managed scratch, plan, or worktree roots. After each invocation exits, its
scratch tree is archived under the deterministic results/scratch/<check-id-and-side> path, its
private plan copy is discarded, and every readable argv element that resolves to a file is hashed
in argv_files. Files inside the isolated plan or checkout roots are additionally retained under
results/helpers/<sha256> up to 16 MiB; the record explains why any other file was not archived.
Use a dedicated directory for plan.json: its sibling files and directories are copied into each
invocation's {plan_dir}. Keep helper code under that directory's checks/ directory or checked
into the target repository so its bytes are reviewable. The machine plan containing commit pins,
the current output directory, and detected prior result trees are excluded; symlinks are rejected.
The clean snapshot remains only in runner memory, and
exploit/variant sides execute in random order while evidence filenames remain deterministic.
Stdout/stderr use anonymous or randomly named capture descriptors and are copied to the named
evidence files only after the child exits, so fd inspection cannot disclose the side label.
This isolation is not a host sandbox: checks run with the caller's privileges and a malicious helper could use arbitrary external state or deliberately infer the revision from source or Git metadata. Inspect the content-addressed helper artifacts, and use an OS/container sandbox when the check code itself is untrusted.
Active validation worktrees are Git-locked with random owner tokens backed by kernel file locks, so
another concurrent validator cannot prune them and PID reuse cannot impersonate an owner. If the
runner is forcibly killed, the next run unlocks stale validator-owned registrations. For manual
recovery, inspect git worktree list, then use git worktree unlock <path> and
git worktree remove --force <path> (or git worktree prune after the path is gone).
Read evidence-model.md when designing coverage, selecting variants, or interpreting findings and validation gaps. Do not read it for routine CLI execution.
Coverage Rules
- Derive variants from the root cause, not cosmetic mutations of the original payload.
- Enumerate sibling call sites, alternate callbacks/outputs, error paths, teardown, ownership, serialization, and boundary values touched by the fix.
- Make each exploit or variant test assert the safe behavior. It must fail on the vulnerable base; a test that passes on both revisions proves nothing about remediation. Read the base-side stderr and confirm the failure is the assertion you wrote, not a harness that never got there.
- Keep exploit and variant assertions limited to the security invariant. Test liveness, exact
error types/messages, timing, and compatibility separately as
behaviororregressionchecks; otherwise an unrelated contract change can masquerade as proof that the vulnerability remains. - Keep the
controlharness benign and make it exercise the changed component. It establishes that the harness works on both revisions. Failed controls leave gaps and prevent attributing other failures to the patch. The raw observations remain available for review. - Use
behavioronly for behavior that should remain unchanged. Exact output comparison is deliberate; move unstable values behind a deterministic test harness instead of normalizing them away in prose. - Make
securitychecks pass on the vulnerable base before treating a patched failure as newly introduced. A failed baseline leaves attribution unresolved. - Do not edit the patch during validation. Return failures to the patch author and start a new, freshly pinned run.
Reading the result
result.json schema 2.0 contains an assessment with status, findings, gaps, and
human_review_required. Status is complete when all required checks produced usable evidence,
even if some checks found failures. Status is incomplete when any gap remains. Findings name the
check ID, check kind, and failed expectation. Gaps name the check ID and missing evidence, with a
null check ID for run-level problems such as cleanup failures.
Suite checks run on the patched revision first. A completed failure triggers the same check on baseline. If baseline passes, report the failure after the patch. If both fail, preserve both logs and report that attribution is unresolved. Do not assume matching exit codes mean the same failure.
The runner exits 0 for complete checks with no findings, 1 for complete checks with findings, 10 for incomplete validation, and 64 for invalid inputs. Read the artifact even after exit 10: it can contain supported findings alongside gaps. Source or build evidence cannot establish runtime behavior. State the evidence level alongside any passing result.
Claude Dynamic Workflow
Claude Code exposes the bundled workflow as /post-patch-validation:validate-patch.
To pass structured inputs through the Workflow tool, use the name without a leading slash:
Workflow({
name: 'post-patch-validation:validate-patch',
args: {
finding: '<finding text or local path>',
baseRef: '<vulnerable-ref>',
patchRef: '<patched-ref>',
workdir: 'post-patch-validation',
},
})
Use patchFile instead of patchRef when appropriate. The workflow uses fixed coverage
lenses to propose checks and a fixed executor to run this skill. Agents may author test
artifacts. The Python runner records findings and gaps, and reviewers report coverage or evidence
concerns separately. NEEDS_REPAIR returns supported failures even when other checks left gaps.
BLOCKED means evidence is incomplete without a supported failure. Passing checks advance to
READY_FOR_HUMAN_REVIEW only after both evidence reviews approve, otherwise REVIEW_REQUIRED.
The workflow cannot ask questions after launch, so pass every input up front.
Rationalizations to Reject
| Rationalization | Required response |
|---|---|
| "The original PoC no longer works" | Test at least one independent root-cause variant |
| "The exploit failed on base, so it reproduced" | Confirm the marker and that the failure is the assertion, not a broken harness |
| "The full suite passes" | Prove baseline reproduction and targeted behavior explicitly |
| "This matches the upstream/canonical patch" | Treat provenance as context, not evidence |
| "The diff is tiny" | Exercise callers, failure paths, and teardown affected by the change |
| "All supplied checks passed" | Preserve artifacts and require human review |
| "A flaky rerun passed" | Keep the first pinned result; fix nondeterminism before retrying |
| "There is no obvious variant" | Inspect sibling sites and boundaries; otherwise report the missing coverage |
GitHub 저장소
자주 묻는 질문
post-patch-validation Skill이란 무엇인가요?
post-patch-validation은(는) trailofbits이(가) 만든 Claude Skill입니다. Skill은 Claude가 필요할 때 불러오는 지침과 리소스를 묶어 추가 프롬프트 없이 post-patch-validation 관련 작업을 수행할 수 있게 합니다.
post-patch-validation은(는) 어떻게 설치하나요?
이 페이지의 설치 명령을 사용하세요. post-patch-validation을(를) Claude Code 플러그인으로 추가하거나 저장소를 skills 디렉터리에 복제한 다음 Claude를 다시 시작해 Skill을 불러옵니다.
post-patch-validation은(는) 어떤 카테고리에 속하나요?
post-patch-validation은(는) 메타 카테고리에 속합니다.
post-patch-validation은(는) 무료로 사용할 수 있나요?
네. post-patch-validation은(는) AIMCP에 등록되어 있으며 무료로 설치할 수 있습니다.
연관 스킬
이 스킬은 콘텐츠 콜렉션(Content Collections)을 위한 프로덕션 검증된 설정을 제공합니다. 콘텐츠 콜렉션은 Markdown/MDX 파일을 Zod 검증이 포함된 타입 안전한 데이터 콜렉션으로 변환해주는 TypeScript 최우선 도구입니다. 블로그, 문서 사이트 또는 콘텐츠 중심의 Vite + React 애플리케이션을 구축할 때 타입 안전성과 자동 콘텐츠 검증을 보장하기 위해 사용하세요. Vite 플러그인 구성과 MDX 컴파일부터 배포 최적화 및 스키마 검증에 이르기까지 모든 것을 다룹니다.
이 스킬은 개발자들이 Polymarket 예측 시장 플랫폼을 활용한 애플리케이션을 구축할 수 있도록 지원하며, 거래 및 시장 데이터를 위한 API 통합 기능을 포함합니다. 또한 WebSocket을 통한 실시간 데이터 스트리밍을 제공하여 실시간 거래와 시장 활동을 모니터링할 수 있습니다. 이를 통해 거래 전략을 구현하거나 실시간 시장 업데이트를 처리하는 도구를 생성하는 데 활용할 수 있습니다.
이 스킬은 개발자들이 명령어, 파일, LSP 작업 등 25개 이상의 이벤트 유형에 연결되는 OpenCode 플러그인을 만들 수 있도록 돕습니다. JavaScript/TypeScript 모듈을 위한 플러그인 구조, 이벤트 API 명세, 구현 패턴을 제공합니다. OpenCode AI 어시스턴트의 라이프사이클을 사용자 정의 이벤트 기반 로직으로 가로채거나, 모니터링하거나, 확장해야 할 때 사용하세요.
SGLang은 RadixAttention 프리픽스 캐싱을 활용하여 JSON, 정규식, 에이전트 워크플로우를 위한 고속 구조화 생성에 특화된 고성능 LLM 서빙 프레임워크입니다. 특히 반복되는 프리픽스가 있는 작업에서 상당히 빠른 추론 속도를 제공하여 복잡한 구조화 출력 및 다중 턴 대화에 이상적입니다. 제약 디코딩이 필요하거나 광범위한 프리픽스 공유가 있는 애플리케이션을 구축할 때는 vLLM과 같은 대안보다 SGLang을 선택하십시오.
