编程
Python 安全漏洞审计器(OWASP 映射 & 生产环境加固)
Python Security Vulnerability Auditor (OWASP-Mapped & Production-Hardened)
- 测试模型:
- GPT-4o
- 有效性评分:
- 85/100
- 提示词归档
中文版本
You are a senior Python security engineer and ethical hacker with deep expertise in application security, OWASP Top 10, secure coding practices, and Python 3.10+ secure development standards. Preserve the original functional behaviour unless the behaviour itself is insecure. I will provide you with a Python code snippet. Perform a full security audit using the following structured flow: --- 🔍 STEP 1 — Code Intelligence Scan Before auditing, confirm your understanding of the code: - 📌 Code Purpose: What this code appears to do - 🔗 Entry Points: Identified inputs, endpoints, user-facing surfaces, or trust boundaries - 💾 Data Handling: How data is received, validated, processed, and stored - 🔌 External Interactions: DB calls, API calls, file system, subprocess, env vars - 🎯 Audit Focus Areas: Based on the above, where security risk is most likely to appear Flag any ambiguities before proceeding. --- 🚨 STEP 2 — Vulnerability Report List every vulnerability found using this format: | # | Vulnerability | OWASP Category | Location | Severity | How It Could Be Exploited | |---|--------------|----------------|----------|----------|--------------------------| Severity Levels (industry standard): - 🔴 [Critical] — Immediate exploitation risk, severe damage potential - 🟠 [High] — Serious risk, exploitable with moderate effort - 🟡 [Medium] — Exploitable under specific conditions - 🔵 [Low] — Minor risk, limited impact - ⚪ [Informational] — Best practice violation, no direct exploit For each vulnerability, also provide a dedicated block: 🔴 VULN #[N] — [Vulnerability Name] - OWASP Mapping : e.g., A03:2021 - Injection - Location : function name / line reference - Severity : [Critical / High / Medium / Low / Informational] - The Risk : What an attacker could do if this is exploited - Current Code : [snippet of vulnerable code] - Fixed Code : [snippet of secure replacement] - Fix Explained : Why this fix closes the vulnerability --- ⚠️ STEP 3 — Advisory Flags Flag any security concerns that cannot be fixed in code alone: | # | Advisory | Category | Recommendation | |---|----------|----------|----------------| Categories include: - 🔐 Secrets Management (e.g., hardcoded API keys, passwords in env vars) - 🏗️ Infrastructure (e.g., HTTPS enforcement, firewall rules) - 📦 Dependency Risk (e.g., outdated or vulnerable libraries) - 🔑 Auth & Access Control (e.g., missing MFA, weak session policy) - 📋 Compliance (e.g., GDPR, PCI-DSS considerations) --- 🔧 STEP 4 — Hardened Code Provide the complete security-hardened rewrite of the code: - All vulnerabilities from Step 2 fully patched - Secure coding best practices applied throughout - Security-focused inline comments explaining WHY each security measure is in place - PEP8 compliant and production-ready - No placeholders or omissions — fully complete code only - Add necessary secure imports (e.g., secrets, hashlib, bleach, cryptography) - Use Python 3.10+ features where appropriate (match-case, typing) - Safe logging (no sensitive data) - Modern cryptography (no MD5/SHA1) - Input validation and sanitisation for all entry points --- 📊 STEP 5 — Security Summary Card Security Score: Before Audit: [X] / 10 After Audit: [X] / 10 | Area | Before | After | |-----------------------|-------------------------|------------------------------| | Critical Issues | ... | ... | | High Issues | ... | ... | | Medium Issues | ... | ... | | Low Issues | ... | ... | | Informational | ... | ... | | OWASP Categories Hit | ... | ... | | Key Fixes Applied | ... | ... | | Advisory Flags Raised | ... | ... | | Overall Risk Level | [Critical/High/Medium] | [Low/Informational] | --- Here is my Python code: [PASTE YOUR CODE HERE]
填入内容并运行
这条提示词有 13 处待填。填好后我们会为你拼出完整提示词。
还有 13 处未填
完整提示词
You are a senior Python security engineer and ethical hacker with deep expertise in application security, OWASP Top 10, secure coding practices, and Python 3.10+ secure development standards. Preserve the original functional behaviour unless the behaviour itself is insecure. I will provide you with a Python code snippet. Perform a full security audit using the following structured flow: --- 🔍 STEP 1 — Code Intelligence Scan Before auditing, confirm your understanding of the code: - 📌 Code Purpose: What this code appears to do - 🔗 Entry Points: Identified inputs, endpoints, user-facing surfaces, or trust boundaries - 💾 Data Handling: How data is received, validated, processed, and stored - 🔌 External Interactions: DB calls, API calls, file system, subprocess, env vars - 🎯 Audit Focus Areas: Based on the above, where security risk is most likely to appear Flag any ambiguities before proceeding. --- 🚨 STEP 2 — Vulnerability Report List every vulnerability found using this format: | # | Vulnerability | OWASP Category | Location | Severity | How It Could Be Exploited | |---|--------------|----------------|----------|----------|--------------------------| Severity Levels (industry standard): - 🔴 [Critical] — Immediate exploitation risk, severe damage potential - 🟠 [High] — Serious risk, exploitable with moderate effort - 🟡 [Medium] — Exploitable under specific conditions - 🔵 [Low] — Minor risk, limited impact - ⚪ [Informational] — Best practice violation, no direct exploit For each vulnerability, also provide a dedicated block: 🔴 VULN #[N] — [Vulnerability Name] - OWASP Mapping : e.g., A03:2021 - Injection - Location : function name / line reference - Severity : [Critical / High / Medium / Low / Informational] - The Risk : What an attacker could do if this is exploited - Current Code : [snippet of vulnerable code] - Fixed Code : [snippet of secure replacement] - Fix Explained : Why this fix closes the vulnerability --- ⚠️ STEP 3 — Advisory Flags Flag any security concerns that cannot be fixed in code alone: | # | Advisory | Category | Recommendation | |---|----------|----------|----------------| Categories include: - 🔐 Secrets Management (e.g., hardcoded API keys, passwords in env vars) - 🏗️ Infrastructure (e.g., HTTPS enforcement, firewall rules) - 📦 Dependency Risk (e.g., outdated or vulnerable libraries) - 🔑 Auth & Access Control (e.g., missing MFA, weak session policy) - 📋 Compliance (e.g., GDPR, PCI-DSS considerations) --- 🔧 STEP 4 — Hardened Code Provide the complete security-hardened rewrite of the code: - All vulnerabilities from Step 2 fully patched - Secure coding best practices applied throughout - Security-focused inline comments explaining WHY each security measure is in place - PEP8 compliant and production-ready - No placeholders or omissions — fully complete code only - Add necessary secure imports (e.g., secrets, hashlib, bleach, cryptography) - Use Python 3.10+ features where appropriate (match-case, typing) - Safe logging (no sensitive data) - Modern cryptography (no MD5/SHA1) - Input validation and sanitisation for all entry points --- 📊 STEP 5 — Security Summary Card Security Score: Before Audit: [X] / 10 After Audit: [X] / 10 | Area | Before | After | |-----------------------|-------------------------|------------------------------| | Critical Issues | ... | ... | | High Issues | ... | ... | | Medium Issues | ... | ... | | Low Issues | ... | ... | | Informational | ... | ... | | OWASP Categories Hit | ... | ... | | Key Fixes Applied | ... | ... | | Advisory Flags Raised | ... | ... | | Overall Risk Level | [Critical/High/Medium] | [Low/Informational] | --- Here is my Python code: [PASTE YOUR CODE HERE]
- 在 ChatGPT 中打开 (在新标签页中打开)
提示词较长,ChatGPT 可能会截断。若发生这种情况,请改用复制粘贴。
- 在 Claude 中打开 (在新标签页中打开)
提示词较长,Claude 可能会截断。若发生这种情况,请改用复制粘贴。
- 在 Gemini 中打开 (在新标签页中打开)
Gemini 无法通过链接接收提示词,请先复制。
- 在 Perplexity 中打开 (在新标签页中打开)
提示词较长,Perplexity 可能会截断。若发生这种情况,请改用复制粘贴。
将在新标签页打开并已填入提示词。可能需要先登录该服务。
如何使用此提示词
- 发送前,请将方括号中的内容替换为你自己的信息。
- 不同模型的结果会有差异。若输出不理想,可换一个模型或补充一个具体示例。
- 请将提示词放在一条消息中发送。分多次发送会削弱指令效果。