hook-management
Fail
Audited by Gen Agent Trust Hub on Feb 16, 2026
Risk Level: HIGHPROMPT_INJECTIONCOMMAND_EXECUTIONREMOTE_CODE_EXECUTION
Full Analysis
- Prompt Injection (HIGH): The
references/audit-framework.mdfile contains several instructions marked as 'MANDATORY' and 'CRITICAL' that attempt to override the agent's analytical capabilities. It explicitly instructs the auditor to 'never skip' steps that limit findings to those found in 'official documentation' and declares findings 'INVALID' if they cannot be verified externally. This is a self-referential defense mechanism designed to suppress security analysis findings. - Indirect Prompt Injection (HIGH): The 'Suggest Parallelization' hook (
references/inventory/active-hooks.md) analyzes user-submitted prompts and 'injects a system reminder into Claude's context'. - Ingestion point: User prompts analyzed in
active-hooks.md. - Boundary markers: Absent in the description of context injection.
- Capability inventory: Full
Bashtool access andWrite/Editcapabilities across the framework. - Sanitization: Not documented; the hook directly influences the system context based on external input.
- Command Execution (HIGH): The core functionality involves registering and executing arbitrary shell commands and scripts (Bash, .NET, Python) in response to tool usage (e.g.,
PreToolUse). Registration in.claude/settings.jsonallows for execution of any command path, providing a high-privilege execution vector. - Dynamic Execution (MEDIUM): The framework supports multi-language implementations, including .NET 10 with AOT compilation. Scripts are dynamically loaded and executed via wrapper scripts (
dotnet-run.sh), increasing the complexity and potential attack surface for runtime injection.
Recommendations
- AI detected serious security threats
Audit Metadata