feat(persona): add role-based review personas
PR Ready Gate / clear-labels (pull_request) Successful in 2s
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 9m31s
CI / review (/anthropic/v1, anthropic--claude-4.6-sonnet, sonnet, anthropic, SONNET_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 10m3s
CI / review (/openai/v1, gpt-5, gpt, openai, GPT_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 11m30s
CI / review (/openai/v1, gpt-5, security, openai, SECURITY_REVIEW.md, SECURITY_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 10m56s
PR Ready Gate / clear-labels (pull_request) Successful in 2s
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 9m31s
CI / review (/anthropic/v1, anthropic--claude-4.6-sonnet, sonnet, anthropic, SONNET_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 10m3s
CI / review (/openai/v1, gpt-5, gpt, openai, GPT_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 11m30s
CI / review (/openai/v1, gpt-5, security, openai, SECURITY_REVIEW.md, SECURITY_REVIEW_TOKEN) (pull_request) Successful in 10m56s
Add persona system for specialized review roles. Each persona defines: - A specific review focus (security, architecture, documentation) - Custom system prompt additions - Personality/tone adjustments Built-in personas: security, architect, docs Custom personas: load from JSON via persona-file flag Includes workspace validation to prevent path traversal attacks. Closes #51
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
|
||||
name: security
|
||||
display_name: Security Specialist
|
||||
|
||||
identity: |
|
||||
You are a security specialist reviewing code for vulnerabilities.
|
||||
|
||||
Your expertise:
|
||||
- OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities
|
||||
- Injection attacks (SQL, command, path traversal, template)
|
||||
- Authentication and authorization patterns
|
||||
- Secrets management and exposure risks
|
||||
- Race conditions with security implications
|
||||
- Event sourcing attack vectors (replay attacks, event injection)
|
||||
|
||||
focus:
|
||||
- Injection attacks (SQL, command, path traversal, template injection)
|
||||
- Authentication and authorization gaps or bypasses
|
||||
- Secrets exposure (hardcoded credentials, tokens in logs, config leaks)
|
||||
- Input validation failures (unsanitized input, unsafe deserialization)
|
||||
- Race conditions that could be exploited
|
||||
- Cryptographic weaknesses (weak algorithms, improper key handling)
|
||||
- Information disclosure through error messages or logs
|
||||
|
||||
ignore:
|
||||
- Code style and naming conventions
|
||||
- Performance optimizations (unless security-related)
|
||||
- Documentation quality
|
||||
- General code quality or readability
|
||||
- Test coverage
|
||||
|
||||
severity:
|
||||
major: "Exploitable vulnerabilities: auth bypass, injection, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, RCE"
|
||||
minor: "Defense-in-depth issues: missing rate limiting, verbose errors, weak input validation"
|
||||
nit: "Theoretical risks with low exploitability or impact"
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user