🎁 Get the FREE AI Skills Starter Guide β€” Subscribe β†’
BytesAgainBytesAgain
πŸ¦€ ClawHub

Elixir Security Review

by @anderskev

Reviews Elixir code for security vulnerabilities including code injection, atom exhaustion, and secret handling. Use when reviewing code handling user input,...

TERMINAL
clawhub install elixir-security-review

πŸ“– About This Skill


name: elixir-security-review description: Reviews Elixir code for security vulnerabilities including code injection, atom exhaustion, and secret handling. Use when reviewing code handling user input, external data, or sensitive configuration.

Elixir Security Review

Quick Reference

| Issue Type | Reference | |------------|-----------| | Code.eval_string, binary_to_term | references/code-injection.md | | String.to_atom dangers | references/atom-exhaustion.md | | Config, environment variables | references/secrets.md | | ETS visibility, process dictionary | references/process-exposure.md |

Review Checklist

Critical (Block Merge)

  • [ ] No Code.eval_string/1 on user input
  • [ ] No :erlang.binary_to_term/1 without :safe on untrusted data
  • [ ] No String.to_atom/1 on external input
  • [ ] No hardcoded secrets in source code
  • Major

  • [ ] ETS tables use appropriate access controls
  • [ ] No sensitive data in process dictionary
  • [ ] No dynamic module creation from user input
  • [ ] Path traversal prevented in file operations
  • Configuration

  • [ ] Secrets loaded from environment
  • [ ] No secrets in config/*.exs committed to git
  • [ ] Runtime config used for deployment secrets
  • Valid Patterns (Do NOT Flag)

  • String.to_atom on compile-time constants - Atoms created at compile time are safe
  • Code.eval_string in dev/test - May be needed for tooling
  • ETS :public tables - Valid when intentionally shared
  • binary_to_term with :safe - Explicitly safe option used
  • Context-Sensitive Rules

    | Issue | Flag ONLY IF | |-------|--------------| | String.to_atom | Input comes from external source (user, API, file) | | binary_to_term | Data comes from untrusted source | | ETS :public | Contains sensitive data |

    Hard gates (before reporting)

    Complete in order for each finding you intend to report. Do not advance until the pass condition is satisfied.

    1. Location artifact β€” The finding includes [FILE:LINE] (or a line range) that you copied from the current file contents; the path resolves in this repo. 2. Scope read β€” You read the full surrounding function or module section that contains the flagged code, not only a diff hunk or summary. 3. External-data claim (only if the finding depends on β€œuser/untrusted input”) β€” You can name one concrete ingress (for example conn.params, Jason.decode!/1 result, uploaded file path, message from another node) or you drop the finding because the value is compile-time, test-only, or internal per Context-Sensitive Rules. 4. Protocol β€” Pre-report steps in beagle-elixir:review-verification-protocol (skill) are satisfied for this item (no finding if they are not).

    Before Submitting Findings

    Use the issue format: [FILE:LINE] ISSUE_TITLE for each finding.

    Hard gate 4 requires beagle-elixir:review-verification-protocol (skill); use it as the full pre-report checklist and issue-type verification (it extends beyond this skill’s summary).

    βš™οΈ Configuration

  • [ ] Secrets loaded from environment
  • [ ] No secrets in config/*.exs committed to git
  • [ ] Runtime config used for deployment secrets