mcpField
R
rails-security-review

rails-security-review

github.com/igmarinSecurity2840 installsUpdated 4w ago
Repository

About rails-security-review

rails-security-review is a skill for reviewing and hardening Rails code, aimed at developers assessing application security. It prioritizes exploitable authorization and input-handling issues and prescribes a finding order and report format.

Key features

  1. 01Authorization-first review order
  2. 02Checks for unsafe parameters and queries
  3. 03Reviews redirects, output, files, and secrets
  4. 04Requires concrete exploit scenarios
  5. 05Structured severity and remediation reports

Use cases

  1. 01Reviewing Rails changes for security flaws
  2. 02Auditing authorization on sensitive actions
  3. 03Checking parameter filtering and SQL safety

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/igmarin/rails-agent-skills --skill rails-security-review

After installing, type/rails-security-reviewin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Bundled filesPITFALLS.md

Details

From the project README

Rails Security Review

Use this skill when the task is to review or harden Rails code from a security perspective.

Core principle: Prioritize exploitable issues over style. Assume any untrusted input can be abused.

HARD-GATE: Authorization Findings Lead the Report

BEFORE returning your security review, verify:
  1. The FIRST finding section in your output is "Authentication & Authorization"
  2. SQL injection, XSS, or other findings come AFTER auth/authz — even if
     they feel more severe or were discovered first
  3. If no auth/authz issue exists, the report still opens with an explicit
     "Authentication & Authorization: no issues found" line BEFORE any other
     finding category

Quick Reference

AreaKey Checks
AuthPermissions on every sensitive action
ParamsNo permit!, whitelist only safe attributes
QueriesParameterized — no string interpolation in SQL
RedirectsConstrained to relative paths or allowlist
OutputNo html_safe/raw on user content
SecretsEncrypted credentials, never in code or logs
FilesValidate filename, content type, destination

Review Order

  1. Check authentication and authorization boundaries.
  2. Check parameter handling and sensitive attribute assignment.
  3. Check redirects, rendering, and output encoding.
  4. Check file handling, network calls, and background job inputs.
  5. Check secrets, logging, and operational exposure.
  6. Verify each finding: Confirm it is exploitable with a concrete attack scenario before reporting. Exclude false positives (e.g., html_safe on a developer-defined constant, not user input).

Severity Levels

High
  • Missing or bypassable authorization checks
  • SQL, shell, YAML, or constantization injection paths
  • Unsafe redirects or SSRF-capable outbound requests
  • File upload handling that trusts filename, content type, or destination blindly
  • Secrets or tokens stored in code, logs, or unsafe config
Medium
  • Unscoped mass assignment through weak parameter filtering
  • User-controlled HTML rendered without clear sanitization
  • Sensitive data logged in plaintext
  • Security-relevant behavior hidden in callbacks or background jobs without guardrails
  • Brittle custom auth logic where framework primitives would be safer

Review Checklist

  • Are permissions enforced on every sensitive action?
  • Are untrusted inputs validated before database, filesystem, or network use?
  • Are redirects and URLs constrained?
  • Are secrets stored and logged safely?
  • Are security assumptions explicit and testable?

Examples

High-severity (unscoped redirect):

# Bad: user-controlled redirect — open redirect / phishing risk
redirect_to params[:return_to]

# Good: relative path only
redirect_to root_path
# Good: allowlist
SAFE_PATHS = %w[/dashboard /settings].freeze
redirect_to(SAFE_PATHS.include?(params[:return_to]) ? params[:return_to] : root_path)

Medium-severity (mass assignment):

# Bad: privilege escalation risk
params.require(:user).permit!

# Good: explicit whitelist — never include role, admin, or privilege fields
params.require(:user).permit(:name, :email)

Pitfalls

See PITFALLS.md for the full list. Critical anti-patterns: permit! on any parameter set, html_safe on user content, SQL string interpolation, secrets in committed files.

Output Style

Section order per the HARD-GATE. Every heading appears even when empty (write "No issues found.").

## Authentication & Authorization
## Parameter Handling & Mass Assignment
## Query Safety (SQL / NoSQL / shell injection)
## Output Encoding & Redirects
## Secrets, Logging & Operational Exposure

Each finding carries:

  • Severity: High or Medium (not "Critical")
  • Attack path: input → reach → impact
  • Affected file: path + line, e.g. app/controllers/documents_controller.rb:42
  • Mitigation: smallest credible fix

Integration

SkillWhen to chain
rails-code-reviewFor full code review including non-security concerns
rails-architecture-reviewWhen security issues stem from architectural problems
rails-migration-safetyWhen reviewing migration security (data exposure, constraints)

Comments

Markdown supported