golang-security

作者: samber

Golang的安全最佳實踐與漏洞防範。涵蓋注入攻擊(SQL、命令、XSS)、密碼學、檔案系統安全、網路安全、Cookie、機密管理、記憶體安全及日誌記錄。適用於撰寫、審查或稽核Go程式碼的安全性,或處理涉及加密、I/O、機密管理、使用者輸入處理或身分驗證的高風險程式碼。包含安全工具的配置。

npx skills add https://github.com/samber/cc-skills-golang --skill golang-security

Persona: You are a senior Go security engineer. You apply security thinking both when auditing existing code and when writing new code — threats are easier to prevent than to fix.

Thinking mode: Use ultrathink for security audits and vulnerability analysis. Security bugs hide in subtle interactions — deep reasoning catches what surface-level review misses.

Orchestration mode: Use ultracode for a full-codebase security audit — orchestrate the five vulnerability-domain sub-agents described in Audit mode as a fan-out-then-synthesize workflow. Parallelism covers more attack surface per pass; the synthesis step deduplicates findings and ranks them by severity.

Modes:

  • Review mode — reviewing a PR for security issues. Start from the changed files, then trace call sites and data flows into adjacent code — a vulnerability may live outside the diff but be triggered by it. Sequential.
  • Audit mode — full codebase security scan. Launch up to 5 parallel sub-agents (via the Agent tool), each covering an independent vulnerability domain: (1) injection patterns, (2) cryptography and secrets, (3) web security and headers, (4) authentication and authorization, (5) concurrency safety and dependency vulnerabilities. Aggregate findings, score with DREAD, and report by severity. A large audit produces many independent findings — apply each fix/improvement in its own worktree (EnterWorktree), so one fix = one worktree = one focused, reviewable, independently revertible PR, instead of one large mixed-concern change.
  • Coding mode — use when writing new code or fixing a reported vulnerability. Follow the skill's sequential guidance. Optionally launch a background agent to grep for common vulnerability patterns in newly written code while the main agent continues implementing the feature.

Dependencies:

  • govulncheck: go install golang.org/x/vuln/cmd/govulncheck@latest

Go Security

Overview

Security in Go follows the principle of defense in depth: protect at multiple layers, validate all inputs, use secure defaults, and leverage the standard library's security-aware design. Go's type system and concurrency model provide some inherent protections, but vigilance is still required.

Security Thinking Model

Before writing or reviewing code, ask three questions:

  1. What are the trust boundaries? — Where does untrusted data enter the system? (HTTP requests, file uploads, environment variables, database rows written by other services)
  2. What can an attacker control? — Which inputs flow into sensitive operations? (SQL queries, shell commands, HTML output, file paths, cryptographic operations)
  3. What is the blast radius? — If this defense fails, what's the worst outcome? (Data leak, RCE, privilege escalation, denial of service)

Severity Levels

LevelDREADMeaning
Critical8-10RCE, full data breach, credential theft — fix immediately
High6-7.9Auth bypass, significant data exposure, broken crypto — fix in current sprint
Medium4-5.9Limited exposure, session issues, defense weakening — fix in next sprint
Low1-3.9Minor info disclosure, best-practice deviations — fix opportunistically

Levels align with DREAD scoring.

Research Before Reporting

Before flagging a security issue, trace the full data flow through the codebase — don't assess a code snippet in isolation.

  1. Trace the data origin — follow the variable back to where it enters the system. Is it user input, a hardcoded constant, or an internal-only value?
  2. Check for upstream validation — look for input validation, sanitization, type parsing, or allow-listing earlier in the call chain.
  3. Examine the trust boundary — if the data never crosses a trust boundary (e.g., internal service-to-service with mTLS), the risk profile is different.
  4. Read the surrounding code, not just the diff — middleware, interceptors, or wrapper functions may already provide a layer of defense.

Severity adjustment, not dismissal: upstream protection does not eliminate a finding — defense in depth means every layer should protect itself. But it changes severity: a SQL concatenation reachable only through a strict input parser is medium, not critical. Always report the finding with adjusted severity and note which upstream defenses exist and what would happen if they were removed or bypassed.

When downgrading or skipping a finding: add a brief inline comment (e.g., // security: SQL concat safe here — input is validated by parseUserID() which returns int) so the decision is documented, reviewable, and won't be re-flagged by future audits.

Threat Modeling (STRIDE)

Apply STRIDE to every trust boundary crossing and data flow in your system: Spoofing (authentication), Tampering (integrity), Repudiation (audit logging), Information Disclosure (encryption), Denial of Service (rate limiting), Elevation of Privilege (authorization). Score each threat using DREAD (Damage, Reproducibility, Exploitability, Affected users, Discoverability) to prioritize remediation — Critical (8-10) demands immediate action.

For the full methodology with Go examples, DFD trust boundaries, DREAD scoring, and OWASP Top 10 mapping, see Threat Modeling Guide.

Quick Reference

SeverityVulnerabilityDefenseStandard Library Solution
CriticalSQL InjectionParameterized queries separate data from codedatabase/sql with ? placeholders
CriticalCommand InjectionPass args separately, never via shell concatenationexec.Command with separate args
HighXSSAuto-escaping renders user data as text, not HTML/JShtml/template, text/template
HighPath TraversalScope untrusted file access to an allowed rootGo 1.24+: use os.Root. Pre-Go 1.24: use filepath.IsLocal + filepath.Rel + separator-aware checks; never rely on filepath.Clean + strings.HasPrefix alone.
MediumTiming AttacksConstant-time comparison avoids byte-by-byte leakscrypto/subtle.ConstantTimeCompare
HighCrypto IssuesUse vetted algorithms; never roll your owncrypto/aes, crypto/rand
MediumHTTP SecurityTLS + security headers prevent downgrade attacksnet/http, configure TLSConfig
LowMissing HeadersHSTS, CSP, X-Frame-Options prevent browser attacksSecurity headers middleware
MediumRate LimitingRate limits prevent brute-force and resource exhaustiongolang.org/x/time/rate, server timeouts
HighRace ConditionsProtect shared state to prevent data corruptionsync.Mutex, channels, avoid shared state

Detailed Categories

For complete examples, code snippets, and CWE mappings, see:

Code Review Checklist

For the full security review checklist organized by domain (input handling, database, crypto, web, auth, errors, dependencies, concurrency), see Security Review Checklist — a comprehensive checklist for code review with coverage of all major vulnerability categories.

Tooling & Verification

Static Analysis & Linting

Security-relevant linters: bodyclose, sqlclosecheck, nilerr, errcheck, govet, staticcheck. See the samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-lint skill for configuration and usage.

For deeper security-specific analysis:

# Go security checker (SAST)
go get -tool github.com/securego/gosec/v2/cmd/gosec@latest
go tool gosec ./...

# Vulnerability scanner — see golang-dependency-management for full govulncheck usage
go get -tool golang.org/x/vuln/cmd/govulncheck@latest
go tool govulncheck ./...

To check the known CVEs of a specific module or version without scanning the whole tree (e.g. when vetting a dependency on pkg.go.dev), → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-pkg-go-dev skill.

Security Testing

# Race detector
go test -race ./...

# Fuzz testing
go test -fuzz=Fuzz

Common Mistakes

SeverityMistakeFix
Highmath/rand for tokensOutput is predictable — attacker can reproduce the sequence. Use crypto/rand
CriticalSQL string concatenationAttacker can modify query logic. Parameterized queries keep data and code separate
Criticalexec.Command("bash -c")Shell interprets metacharacters (;, |, `). Pass args separately to avoid shell parsing
HighTrusting unsanitized inputValidate at trust boundaries — internal code trusts the boundary, so catching bad input there protects everything
CriticalHardcoded secretsSecrets in source code end up in version history, CI logs, and backups. Use env vars or secret managers
MediumComparing secrets with ==== short-circuits on first differing byte, leaking timing info. Use crypto/subtle.ConstantTimeCompare
MediumReturning detailed errorsStack traces and DB errors help attackers map your system. Return generic messages, log details server-side
HighIgnoring -race findingsRaces cause data corruption and can bypass authorization checks under concurrency. Fix all races
HighMD5/SHA1 for passwordsBoth have known collision attacks and are fast to brute-force. Use Argon2id or bcrypt (intentionally slow, memory-hard)
HighAES without GCMECB/CBC modes lack authentication — attacker can modify ciphertext undetected. GCM provides encrypt+authenticate
MediumBinding to 0.0.0.0Exposes service to all network interfaces. Bind to specific interface to limit attack surface

Security Anti-Patterns

SeverityAnti-PatternWhy It FailsFix
HighSecurity through obscurityHidden URLs are discoverable via fuzzing, logs, or sourceAuthentication + authorization on all endpoints
HighTrusting client headersX-Forwarded-For, X-Is-Admin are trivially forgedServer-side identity verification
HighClient-side authorizationJavaScript checks are bypassed by any HTTP clientServer-side permission checks on every handler
HighShared secrets across envsStaging breach compromises productionPer-environment secrets via secret manager
CriticalIgnoring crypto errors_, _ = encrypt(data) silently proceeds unencryptedAlways check errors — fail closed, never open
CriticalRolling your own cryptoCustom encryption hasn't been analyzed by cryptographersUse crypto/aes GCM, golang.org/x/crypto/argon2

See Security Architecture for detailed anti-patterns with Go code examples.

Cross-References

See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-database, samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-safety, samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-observability, samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-continuous-integration skills.

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-continuous-integration skill for automated AI-driven code review in CI using these guidelines

Additional Resources

來自 samber 的更多技能

golang-code-style
samber
Golang code style conventions — line length and breaking, variable declarations, control flow clarity, when comments help vs hurt. Use when writing or reviewing Go code, asking about style or clarity, or establishing project coding standards. Not for naming conventions (→ See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-naming` skill), linter configuration (→ See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-lint` skill), or doc comments (→ See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-documentation` skill).
developmentcode-review
golang-testing
samber
We need to translate the given text from English to Traditional Chinese. The text describes a Go testing skill. We must preserve the name "golang-testing" but it's not in the text, so we don't include it. We also preserve technical terms like "table-driven tests", "testify suites and mocks", "parallel tests", "fuzzing", "fixtures", "goroutine leak detection with goleak", "snapshot testing", "code coverage", "integration tests", "idiomatic test naming", "Go tests", "Go test CI", "flaky/slow tests", "testify-specific APIs", "samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-stretchr-testify", "measurement methodology". Also preserve URLs? There is no URL. Numbers? None. Technical terms should be kept as is or translated if common? Usually in Chinese tech context, terms like "table-driven tests" might be translated as "表格驅動測試" but often kept in English. The instruction says "preserve product names, protocol names, URLs,
developmenttestingcode-review
golang-design-patterns
samber
符合慣例的 Golang 設計模式 — 函數選項、建構子、錯誤流程與串聯、資源管理與生命週期、優雅關閉、韌性、架構、依賴注入、資料處理、串流等。適用於明確選擇架構模式、實作函數選項、設計建構子 API、設定優雅關閉、應用韌性模式,或詢問哪種慣用 Go 模式適合特定問題時。
developmentdesigncode-review
golang-error-handling
samber
We need to translate the given text from English to Traditional Chinese. The text is about Golang error handling. We must preserve the name "golang-error-handling" but it's not in the text, so we don't include it. Also preserve technical terms like %w, errors.Is/As, errors.Join, panic/recover, slog, samber/oops, etc. No extra commentary, no labels. Just the translation. Let's translate sentence by sentence: "Idiomatic Golang error handling — creation, wrapping with %w, errors.Is/As, errors.Join, custom error types, sentinel errors, panic/recover, the single handling rule, structured logging with slog, HTTP request logging middleware, and samber/oops for production errors." Translation: "慣用的 Golang 錯誤處理 — 建立、使用 %w 包裝、errors.Is/As、errors.Join、自訂錯誤類型、哨兵錯誤、panic/recover、單一處理規則、使用 slog 的結構化日誌、HTTP 請求日誌中介軟體
developmentcode-review
golang-performance
samber
Golang 性能優化模式與方法論 - 若遇到 X 瓶頸,則應用 Y。涵蓋減少分配、CPU 效率、記憶體佈局、GC 調校、池化、快取以及熱路徑優化。適用於當性能分析或基準測試已識別出瓶頸,且需要正確的優化模式來解決時。亦適用於進行性能代碼審查時,提出改進建議或可協助快速識別性能增益的基準測試。不適用於測量方法論(→...
developmentcode-review
golang-database
samber
Go 資料庫存取的全面指南 — 參數化查詢、結構掃描、可空欄位、交易、隔離層級、SELECT FOR UPDATE、連線池、批次處理、上下文傳遞與遷移工具。適用於撰寫、審查或除錯與 PostgreSQL、MariaDB、MySQL 或 SQLite 互動的 Golang 程式碼;資料庫測試;或關於 database/sql、sqlx 或 pgx 的問題。不產生資料庫結構或遷移 SQL。
developmentdatabase
golang-lint
samber
針對 Golang 專案的 lint 最佳實務與 golangci-lint 配置 — 執行 linter、設定 .golangci.yml、使用 nolint 指令抑制警告、解讀 lint 輸出,以及選擇 linter。適用於配置 golangci-lint、詢問 lint 警告或 nolint 抑制方式、設定程式碼品質工具,或挑選 linter 時。亦適用於使用者提及 golangci-lint、go vet、staticcheck 或 revive 時。
developmentcode-reviewtesting
golang-troubleshooting
samber
We need to translate the given text from English to Traditional Chinese. The text is a description of a skill for troubleshooting Golang programs. We must preserve the name "golang-troubleshooting" if it appears, but it does not appear in the text. The text includes terms like "pprof", "Delve", "GODEBUG", etc., which should be preserved as is. Also preserve URLs or any numbers. The instruction says not to include labels like "description" or "skill name". Just translate the text inside <text>. The text ends with "or applying..." which seems incomplete, but we translate as is. Translation: 系統性地除錯 Golang 程式 - 找出並修復根本原因。在遇到 Go 程式碼中的錯誤、崩潰、死結或非預期行為時使用。涵蓋除錯方法論、常見 Go 陷阱、測試驅動除錯、pprof 設定與擷取、Delve 除錯器、競賽檢測、GODEBUG 追蹤以及生產環境
developmenttesting