by trailofbits · Codex Skill · ★ 68
Last updated: · Indexed by AgentSkillsHub · Auto-synced every 8h
git clone https://github.com/trailofbits/brotli-checker.gitTaken from the project's README on GitHub.
None of the 42 rules matched — no credential harvesting, no data exfiltration, no curl-pipe-shell installer. Scanned against 42 published rules built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy, refreshed every 8 hours.
The quality score combines nine heuristic checks of the repo and its README: completeness, clarity, specificity, examples, structure, agent readiness, step-by-step content, instruction quality and security notes. It rates how well the project explains itself to an agent, not the code.
| Stars | 68 |
| Forks | 4 |
| Language | Python |
| Category | Codex Skill |
| License | MIT |
| Quality Score | 64/100 |
| Open Issues | 9 |
| Last Updated | 2026-11-06 |
| Created | 2026-10-23 |
| Platforms | claude-code, codex, python |
| Est. Tokens | ~14k |
Brotli Checker Brotli Checker finds copies of the Brotli decoder that may need an update for CVE-2026-111497. Install it as a Claude Code or Codex skill, then ask it to check your project. The skill scans source, dependencies, app packages, and unpacked container filesystems.
These tools work well together with brotli-checker for enhanced workflows:
Looking for a brotli-checker alternative? If you're comparing brotli-checker with other codex skill tools, these 3 projects are the closest alternatives on Agent Skills Hub — ranked by topic overlap, star count, and community traction.
🚀 170+ pre-built skills for Claude Code, Cursor, Codex & 14+ AI tools. Stop re-teaching your AI the same thin
Claude Code / Codex skill: reverse engineer a product & technical spec from a git branch
A Codex/Claude skill that maintains per-repo operating theory documents.
Explore other popular codex skill tools:
Grades come from a rule-based scan built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy: 42 published rules, covering credential harvesting, data exfiltration, curl | sh installers and more. It is a first-layer scan, not a manual audit — we say so rather than overstate it.
The scale of the problem is documented independently: Liu et al. (2026), in a study of 31,132 agent skills, report that 26.1% contain security vulnerabilities. Our own full-catalog census is published as a citable open dataset.
Sources & who's responsible: