agent-owasp-compliance

작성자: github

AI 에이전트 시스템을 OWASP Agentic Security Initiative (ASI) Top 10 — 에이전트 보안 태세의 업계 표준 — 에 따라 평가합니다.

npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill agent-owasp-compliance

Agent OWASP ASI Compliance Check

Evaluate AI agent systems against the OWASP Agentic Security Initiative (ASI) Top 10 — the industry standard for agent security posture.

Overview

The OWASP ASI Top 10 defines the critical security risks specific to autonomous AI agents — not LLMs, not chatbots, but agents that call tools, access systems, and act on behalf of users. This skill checks whether your agent implementation addresses each risk.

Codebase → Scan for each ASI control:
  ASI-01: Prompt Injection Protection
  ASI-02: Tool Use Governance
  ASI-03: Agency Boundaries
  ASI-04: Escalation Controls
  ASI-05: Trust Boundary Enforcement
  ASI-06: Logging & Audit
  ASI-07: Identity Management
  ASI-08: Policy Integrity
  ASI-09: Supply Chain Verification
  ASI-10: Behavioral Monitoring
→ Generate Compliance Report (X/10 covered)

The 10 Risks

RiskNameWhat to Look For
ASI-01Prompt InjectionInput validation before tool calls, not just LLM output filtering
ASI-02Insecure Tool UseTool allowlists, argument validation, no raw shell execution
ASI-03Excessive AgencyCapability boundaries, scope limits, principle of least privilege
ASI-04Unauthorized EscalationPrivilege checks before sensitive operations, no self-promotion
ASI-05Trust Boundary ViolationTrust verification between agents, signed credentials, no blind trust
ASI-06Insufficient LoggingStructured audit trail for all tool calls, tamper-evident logs
ASI-07Insecure IdentityCryptographic agent identity, not just string names
ASI-08Policy BypassDeterministic policy enforcement, no LLM-based permission checks
ASI-09Supply Chain IntegritySigned plugins/tools, integrity verification, dependency auditing
ASI-10Behavioral AnomalyDrift detection, circuit breakers, kill switch capability

Check ASI-01: Prompt Injection Protection

Look for input validation that runs before tool execution, not after LLM generation.

import re
from pathlib import Path

def check_asi_01(project_path: str) -> dict:
    """ASI-01: Is user input validated before reaching tool execution?"""
    positive_patterns = [
        "input_validation", "validate_input", "sanitize",
        "classify_intent", "prompt_injection", "threat_detect",
        "PolicyEvaluator", "PolicyEngine", "check_content",
    ]
    negative_patterns = [
        r"eval\(", r"exec\(", r"subprocess\.run\(.*shell=True",
        r"os\.system\(",
    ]

    # Scan Python files for signals
    root = Path(project_path)
    positive_matches = []
    negative_matches = []

    for py_file in root.rglob("*.py"):
        content = py_file.read_text(errors="ignore")
        for pattern in positive_patterns:
            if pattern in content:
                positive_matches.append(f"{py_file.name}: {pattern}")
        for pattern in negative_patterns:
            if re.search(pattern, content):
                negative_matches.append(f"{py_file.name}: {pattern}")

    positive_found = len(positive_matches) > 0
    negative_found = len(negative_matches) > 0

    return {
        "risk": "ASI-01",
        "name": "Prompt Injection",
        "status": "pass" if positive_found and not negative_found else "fail",
        "controls_found": positive_matches,
        "vulnerabilities": negative_matches,
        "recommendation": "Add input validation before tool execution, not just output filtering"
    }

What passing looks like:

# GOOD: Validate before tool execution
result = policy_engine.evaluate(user_input)
if result.action == "deny":
    return "Request blocked by policy"
tool_result = await execute_tool(validated_input)

What failing looks like:

# BAD: User input goes directly to tool
tool_result = await execute_tool(user_input)  # No validation

Check ASI-02: Insecure Tool Use

Verify tools have allowlists, argument validation, and no unrestricted execution.

What to search for:

  • Tool registration with explicit allowlists (not open-ended)
  • Argument validation before tool execution
  • No subprocess.run(shell=True) with user-controlled input
  • No eval() or exec() on agent-generated code without sandbox

Passing example:

ALLOWED_TOOLS = {"search", "read_file", "create_ticket"}

def execute_tool(name: str, args: dict):
    if name not in ALLOWED_TOOLS:
        raise PermissionError(f"Tool '{name}' not in allowlist")
    # validate args...
    return tools[name](**validated_args)

Check ASI-03: Excessive Agency

Verify agent capabilities are bounded — not open-ended.

What to search for:

  • Explicit capability lists or execution rings
  • Scope limits on what the agent can access
  • Principle of least privilege applied to tool access

Failing: Agent has access to all tools by default. Passing: Agent capabilities defined as a fixed allowlist, unknown tools denied.


Check ASI-04: Unauthorized Escalation

Verify agents cannot promote their own privileges.

What to search for:

  • Privilege level checks before sensitive operations
  • No self-promotion patterns (agent changing its own trust score or role)
  • Escalation requires external attestation (human or SRE witness)

Failing: Agent can modify its own configuration or permissions. Passing: Privilege changes require out-of-band approval (e.g., Ring 0 requires SRE attestation).


Check ASI-05: Trust Boundary Violation

In multi-agent systems, verify that agents verify each other's identity before accepting instructions.

What to search for:

  • Agent identity verification (DIDs, signed tokens, API keys)
  • Trust score checks before accepting delegated tasks
  • No blind trust of inter-agent messages
  • Delegation narrowing (child scope <= parent scope)

Passing example:

def accept_task(sender_id: str, task: dict):
    trust = trust_registry.get_trust(sender_id)
    if not trust.meets_threshold(0.7):
        raise PermissionError(f"Agent {sender_id} trust too low: {trust.current()}")
    if not verify_signature(task, sender_id):
        raise SecurityError("Task signature verification failed")
    return process_task(task)

Check ASI-06: Insufficient Logging

Verify all agent actions produce structured, tamper-evident audit entries.

What to search for:

  • Structured logging for every tool call (not just print statements)
  • Audit entries include: timestamp, agent ID, tool name, args, result, policy decision
  • Append-only or hash-chained log format
  • Logs stored separately from agent-writable directories

Failing: Agent actions logged via print() or not logged at all. Passing: Structured JSONL audit trail with chain hashes, exported to secure storage.


Check ASI-07: Insecure Identity

Verify agents have cryptographic identity, not just string names.

Failing indicators:

  • Agent identified by agent_name = "my-agent" (string only)
  • No authentication between agents
  • Shared credentials across agents

Passing indicators:

  • DID-based identity (did:web:, did:key:)
  • Ed25519 or similar cryptographic signing
  • Per-agent credentials with rotation
  • Identity bound to specific capabilities

Check ASI-08: Policy Bypass

Verify policy enforcement is deterministic — not LLM-based.

What to search for:

  • Policy evaluation uses deterministic logic (YAML rules, code predicates)
  • No LLM calls in the enforcement path
  • Policy checks cannot be skipped or overridden by the agent
  • Fail-closed behavior (if policy check errors, action is denied)

Failing: Agent decides its own permissions via prompt ("Am I allowed to...?"). Passing: PolicyEvaluator.evaluate() returns allow/deny in <0.1ms, no LLM involved.


Check ASI-09: Supply Chain Integrity

Verify agent plugins and tools have integrity verification.

What to search for:

  • INTEGRITY.json or manifest files with SHA-256 hashes
  • Signature verification on plugin installation
  • Dependency pinning (no @latest, >= without upper bound)
  • SBOM generation

Check ASI-10: Behavioral Anomaly

Verify the system can detect and respond to agent behavioral drift.

What to search for:

  • Circuit breakers that trip on repeated failures
  • Trust score decay over time (temporal decay)
  • Kill switch or emergency stop capability
  • Anomaly detection on tool call patterns (frequency, targets, timing)

Failing: No mechanism to stop a misbehaving agent automatically. Passing: Circuit breaker trips after N failures, trust decays without activity, kill switch available.


Compliance Report Format

# OWASP ASI Compliance Report
Generated: 2026-04-01
Project: my-agent-system

## Summary: 7/10 Controls Covered

| Risk | Status | Finding |
|------|--------|---------|
| ASI-01 Prompt Injection | PASS | PolicyEngine validates input before tool calls |
| ASI-02 Insecure Tool Use | PASS | Tool allowlist enforced in governance.py |
| ASI-03 Excessive Agency | PASS | Execution rings limit capabilities |
| ASI-04 Unauthorized Escalation | PASS | Ring promotion requires attestation |
| ASI-05 Trust Boundary | FAIL | No identity verification between agents |
| ASI-06 Insufficient Logging | PASS | AuditChain with SHA-256 chain hashes |
| ASI-07 Insecure Identity | FAIL | Agents use string names, no crypto identity |
| ASI-08 Policy Bypass | PASS | Deterministic PolicyEvaluator, no LLM in path |
| ASI-09 Supply Chain | FAIL | No integrity manifests or plugin signing |
| ASI-10 Behavioral Anomaly | PASS | Circuit breakers and trust decay active |

## Critical Gaps
- ASI-05: Add agent identity verification using DIDs or signed tokens
- ASI-07: Replace string agent names with cryptographic identity
- ASI-09: Generate INTEGRITY.json manifests for all plugins

## Recommendation
Install agent-governance-toolkit for reference implementations of all 10 controls:
pip install agent-governance-toolkit

Quick Assessment Questions

Use these to rapidly assess an agent system:

  1. Does user input pass through validation before reaching any tool? (ASI-01)
  2. Is there an explicit list of what tools the agent can call? (ASI-02)
  3. Can the agent do anything, or are its capabilities bounded? (ASI-03)
  4. Can the agent promote its own privileges? (ASI-04)
  5. Do agents verify each other's identity before accepting tasks? (ASI-05)
  6. Is every tool call logged with enough detail to replay it? (ASI-06)
  7. Does each agent have a unique cryptographic identity? (ASI-07)
  8. Is policy enforcement deterministic (not LLM-based)? (ASI-08)
  9. Are plugins/tools integrity-verified before use? (ASI-09)
  10. Is there a circuit breaker or kill switch? (ASI-10)

If you answer "no" to any of these, that's a gap to address.


Related Resources

github의 다른 스킬

console-rendering
github
Go에서 struct 태그 기반 콘솔 렌더링 시스템 사용 지침
official
acquire-codebase-knowledge
github
사용자가 기존 코드베이스에 대한 매핑, 문서화, 또는 온보딩을 명시적으로 요청할 때 이 스킬을 사용하세요. "이 코드베이스를 매핑해줘", "문서화해줘"와 같은 프롬프트에서 트리거됩니다.
official
acreadiness-assess
github
현재 리포
official
acreadiness-generate-instructions
github
AgentRC 명령어를 통해 맞춤형 AI 에이전트 지침 파일을 생성합니다. .github/copilot-instructions.md 파일을 생성합니다(기본값, VS Code의 Copilot에 권장됨).
official
acreadiness-policy
github
사용자가 AgentRC 정책을 선택, 작성 또는 적용할 수 있도록 지원합니다. 정책은 관련 없는 검사를 비활성화하고, 영향/수준을 재정의하며, 설정을 통해 준비 상태 점수를 사용자 지정합니다.
official
add-educational-comments
github
코드 파일에 교육용 주석을 추가하여 효과적인 학습 자료로 변환합니다. 설명의 깊이와 어조를 세 가지 설정 가능한 지식 수준(초급, 중급, 고급)에 맞게 조정합니다. 파일이 제공되지 않으면 자동으로 요청하며, 빠른 선택을 위해 번호 목록 매칭을 제공합니다. 교육용 주석만을 사용하여 파일을 최대 125%까지 확장합니다(엄격한 제한: 새 줄 400개, 1,000줄 초과 파일의 경우 300개). 파일 인코딩, 들여쓰기 스타일, 구문 정확성 등을 유지합니다.
official
adobe-illustrator-scripting
github
Adobe Illustrator 자동화 스크립트를 ExtendScript(JavaScript/JSX)로 작성, 디버깅 및 최적화합니다. 스크립트를 생성하거나 수정하여 조작할 때 사용합니다.
official
agent-governance
github
선언적 정책, 의도 분류, AI 에이전트 도구 접근 및 행동 제어를 위한 감사 추적. 구성 가능한 거버넌스 정책은 허용/차단된 도구, 콘텐츠 필터, 속도 제한, 승인 요구 사항을 정의하며, 코드가 아닌 구성으로 저장됨. 의미론적 의도 분류는 패턴 기반 신호를 사용하여 도구 실행 전에 위험한 프롬프트(데이터 유출, 권한 상승, 프롬프트 인젝션)를 탐지함. 도구 수준 거버넌스 데코레이터는 함수에서 정책을 적용함...
official