Stop Asking If an AI Skill Is Safe — Ask What It Can Do Instead
A new analysis of AI agent skills highlights a growing supply-chain risk: malicious instructions hidden inside ordinary text files can steal credentials, establish persistence, and survive system reinstalls.
The discussion began after a reported incident in which a user asked Claude for an audio transcription tool recommendation. The model returned a command that installed a malicious clone site. After the system was wiped and files restored from backup, the infection persisted because the payload lived inside a skill.md file that the owner continued to reload.
worklore.dev maintains a library of reusable agent instructions written in plain language. Because these files are executed by agents that run with the user’s full privileges, any unexamined skill is effectively untrusted code.
Scale of the problem
In February 2026 Snyk published ToxicSkills, an analysis of 3984 publicly available agent skills. The study found security issues in 36.8 percent of the skills and critical problems in 13.4 percent. Researchers confirmed 76 malicious payloads, eight of which remained available at publication time.
Documented attack patterns include environment-variable exfiltration via curl, base64-decoded eval commands that harvest AWS credentials, and remote instruction fetching that bypasses initial review. A real-world example is CVE-2025-6514 in the mcp-remote package, which carried a CVSS score of 9.6 and had more than 437 000 installations.
Why security badges fail
Traditional “verified safe” badges are considered unreliable for several reasons:
- Plain text can contain executable instructions such as “read ~/.ssh/id_rsa”.
- Skills can contain prompts that instruct reviewers to ignore previous rules.
- Payloads can be fetched at runtime, making static review meaningless.
- Any badge not bound to a content hash can be swapped after approval.
The proposed alternative is capability disclosure rather than safety certification. A five-tier system describes what a skill is technically able to do:
- T0 — Inert text only.
- T1 — Local predefined scripts and file writes, no network.
- T2 — Outbound network requests to listed endpoints.
- T3 — Persistence, secret access, privilege escalation, or destructive actions.
- T4 — Runtime code loading or decoding that cannot be statically verified.
skill-xray tool
The author released skill-xray under the MIT license. The scanner performs static analysis with regular expressions to extract hashes, network endpoints, and structural indicators, then passes results to an agent layer that produces human-readable reports. The tool deliberately avoids issuing “safe/unsafe” verdicts and instead reports concrete capabilities tied to a specific SHA-256 hash.
Because the system is designed for transparency rather than enforcement, users retain final responsibility for deciding whether a disclosed capability is acceptable for their environment.
Related articles
TenetBench Benchmark Tests LLMs for Compliance with Professional Ethical Codes
Researchers from the Institute of Information Security Issues at ISP RAS and the Institute of Cybersecurity and Information Protection at RANEPA have developed TenetBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate how well large language models adhere to specific norms in professional codes of ethics. The benchmark generates realistic work-related prompts that may conflict with rules from documents such as the Code of Professional Ethics for Advocates or journalistic standards on undisclosed advertising. Each test case pairs a conflicting request with a neutral counterpart to measure whether models refuse, warn, or still provide prohibited content. Evaluation separates task completion, norm violation detection, and presence of explicit refusals using an LLM-as-a-Judge approach validated against human annotators. The full dataset contains 3,433 prompt pairs derived from 15 professional codes, with a public subset of 2,235 pairs from 10 documents. Human validation confirmed 99.5% of generated examples as fully plausible work scenarios.
Solar to Showcase Solar AI Firewall for Business Protection Against AI Risks at SOC Forum 2026
GK Solar will present its new Solar AI Firewall solution at SOC Forum 2026 to help organizations control interactions with AI services and prevent confidential data leaks through employee prompts. The product addresses growing risks from staff sending corporate data to neural networks and AI agents gaining access to internal systems. The forum takes place on 27-28 October in Moscow's Lomonosov cluster, with the official launch of Solar AI Firewall scheduled during the event. Solar will also highlight practical risks of AI adoption, including data transmission to external services, use of public models by employees, and new attack surfaces in corporate infrastructure. The solution will be demonstrated as part of an integrated ecosystem for access, network, and data protection. In addition, the company plans to introduce JSOC ONE, a new line of Solar JSOC services tailored for mid-sized businesses that require 24/7 monitoring without building their own SOC.
Researcher Runs 100 Abliterated AI Agents Against His Own Accounts, Achieves Five Successful Breaches
A security researcher deployed roughly 100 autonomous AI agents based on abliterated open-source models to attempt unauthorized access to his online accounts over a five-hour period. The agents successfully compromised three accounts by exploiting vulnerabilities in legacy personal projects and two additional accounts through password reuse and credential stuffing. They also conducted 16 social engineering attempts, harvested and cross-verified personal data from public sources, and generated phishing pages targeting the researcher's Substack and Hacker News presence. Despite these successes, the agents failed to discover any zero-day vulnerabilities in third-party software or gain access to Tier-0 accounts such as Gmail, 1Password, or banking services. The experiment relied on abliterated versions of GLM-5.3 and DeepSeek V4 Flash models running on cloud GPUs, orchestrated via Codex CLI inside Docker containers with access to Railway infrastructure. Total compute cost reached approximately $210, equating to roughly $40 per successful account compromise. The researcher concluded that inexpensive swarms of such agents could soon enable low-skill attackers to systematically map and exploit an individual's entire online footprint.
How Censorship in Closed AI Models Reshapes Science: Hugging Face Releases Open Carbon-X DNA Model
Hugging Face CEO Clement Delangue announced the release of Carbon-X, an open 14.8 billion parameter language model designed for reading, analyzing, and generating DNA sequences. The announcement highlighted how shallow guardrails in closed commercial models blocked even proofreading a tweet discussing the topic. Commenters and researchers pointed out that these input/output filters lack context awareness, blocking legitimate scientific queries while motivated adversaries bypass them through rephrasing. Carbon-X was built on Qwen3-14B with a hybrid BPE and 6-mer tokenizer, domain mid-training on 302 billion tokens, and safety achieved through data curation rather than runtime censorship. The model achieves performance comparable to closed frontier systems at roughly 1/1800th the inference cost for large-scale genomic tasks. The case underscores growing asymmetry between closed corporate AI labs building wet labs and independent researchers restricted by superficial safety layers.