安全审计
- 作者仓库星标 5,723
- 叉子 499
- 作者更新于 2026年6月15日 16:05
- 作者仓库 skills
- 领域
- 通用
- 兼容 Agent
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- 信任分
- 88 / 100 · 社区维护
- 作者 / 版本 / 许可
- @trailofbits · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 需简单配置
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- 未声明(默认跨平台)
- 底层运行要求
- 无特殊要求
- 文件与系统权限
-
- 只读
- 允许写入 / 修改
- 网络行为
- 仅限本地
- 安装命令数
- 26 条
档案由构建时根据 SKILL.md 与安装命令自动衍生,可能与作者实际意图存在差异。
需要注意: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: ton-vulnerability-scanner
description: Scans TON (The Open Network) smart contracts for 3 critical vulnerabilities including integer-as…
category: 通用
runtime: 无特殊运行时
---
# ton-vulnerability-scanner 输出预览
## PART A: 任务判断
- 适用问题:通用任务拆解、检查和交付。
- 输入要求:目标材料、限制条件、期望输出和验收方式。
- 证据边界:围绕“1. Purpose / 2. When to Use This Skill / 3. Platform Detection”读取原文规则,不把推断写成作者承诺。
## PART B: 执行结果
- **01** 任务判断:确认你的需求是否属于通用任务拆解、检查和交付,并标出输入、限制和预期结果。
- **02** 执行计划:优先按“1. Purpose / 2. When to Use This Skill / 3. Platform Detection”拆成步骤,说明每一步会读取什么、修改什么、产出什么。
- **03** 交付结果:给出可复制的命令、文件改动、检查清单或内容草稿,并说明如何继续迭代。
- **04** 风险边界:结合 读取文件、写入/修改文件、主要在本地完成、通常不需要额外 API Key 给出执行前确认项。
## Running Rules
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先小样例验证,再放大到真实任务。
- 交付时同时给结果、检查口径和下一步迭代建议。 原文没有稳定的斜杠命令要求。安装验证后通常全局生效,直接在对话里点名这个 Skill 并描述任务即可。
告诉 Agent 目标文件或材料、期望结果、不可改范围、是否允许联网或执行命令。本 Skill 的权限画像是:读取文件、写入/修改文件。
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“1. Purpose / 2. When to Use This Skill / 3. Platform Detection”工作;涉及文件或命令时,先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
检查最终产物是否包含明确结果、必要证据和下一步动作;如果输出泛泛而谈,就补充输入、边界和验收标准后重跑。
---
name: ton-vulnerability-scanner
description: Scans TON (The Open Network) smart contracts for 3 critical vulnerabilities including integer-as…
category: 通用
source: trailofbits/skills
---
# ton-vulnerability-scanner
## 什么时候使用
- ton-vulnerability-scanner 是一个通用扩展技能,按 SKILL 适合处理通用任务拆解、检查、交付和复盘,核心价值是把输入、判断、执行、验证和交付边界固定下来,避免 Agent 泛泛回答。 把任务拆成可执行、可检查…
- 面向通用任务拆解、检查和交付,优先处理能明确输入、步骤和验收标准的工作。
## 需要提供什么
- 目标材料、目录范围、期望结果和不可改动内容。
- 是否允许联网、执行命令、读写文件或调用外部服务。
## 执行规则
- 围绕「1. Purpose / 2. When to Use This Skill / 3. Platform Detection」组织步骤,不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先跑小样例,确认结果可检查后再扩大任务范围。
## 输出要求
- 给出最终产物、关键证据、验证方式和下一步动作。
- 信息不足时标记 unknown,不编造命令、平台或依赖。 作者原文负责流程事实;仓库文件负责来源和命令;流狐只补充适用场景、限制和质量判断。
skill "ton-vulnerability-scanner" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> 1. Purpose / 2. When to Use This Skill / 3. Platform Detection
规则层 -> SKILL.md 触发条件 / 执行顺序 / 输出格式
运行层 -> 无特殊运行时 | 读取文件、写入/修改文件 | 主要在本地完成
安全层 -> 通常不需要额外 API Key + 小任务验证 + diff / 日志复核
输出层 -> 可复制结果 + 检查清单 + 下一步迭代
} TON Vulnerability Scanner
1. Purpose
Systematically scan TON blockchain smart contracts written in FunC for platform-specific security vulnerabilities related to boolean logic, Jetton token handling, and gas management. This skill encodes 3 critical vulnerability patterns unique to TON's architecture.
2. When to Use This Skill
- Auditing TON smart contracts (FunC language)
- Reviewing Jetton token implementations
- Validating token transfer notification handlers
- Pre-launch security assessment of TON dApps
- Reviewing gas forwarding logic
- Assessing boolean condition handling
3. Platform Detection
File Extensions & Indicators
- FunC files:
.fc,.func
Language/Framework Markers
;; FunC contract indicators
#include "imports/stdlib.fc";
() recv_internal(int my_balance, int msg_value, cell in_msg_full, slice in_msg_body) impure {
;; Contract logic
}
() recv_external(slice in_msg) impure {
;; External message handler
}
;; Common patterns
send_raw_message()
load_uint(), load_msg_addr(), load_coins()
begin_cell(), end_cell(), store_*()
transfer_notification operation
op::transfer, op::transfer_notification
.store_uint().store_slice().store_coins()
Project Structure
contracts/*.fc- FunC contract sourcewrappers/*.ts- TypeScript wrapperstests/*.spec.ts- Contract testston.config.tsorwasm.config.ts- TON project config
Tool Support
- TON Blueprint: Development framework for TON
- toncli: CLI tool for TON contracts
- ton-compiler: FunC compiler
- Manual review primarily (limited automated tools)
4. How This Skill Works
When invoked, I will:
- Search your codebase for FunC/Tact contracts
- Analyze each contract for the 3 vulnerability patterns
- Report findings with file references and severity
- Provide fixes for each identified issue
- Check replay protection and sender validation
5. Example Output
When vulnerabilities are found, you'll get a report like this:
=== TON VULNERABILITY SCAN RESULTS ===
Project: my-ton-contract
Files Scanned: 3 (.fc, .tact)
Vulnerabilities Found: 2
---
[CRITICAL] Missing Replay Protection
File: contracts/wallet.fc:45
Pattern: No sequence number or nonce validation
---
## 5. Vulnerability Patterns (3 Patterns)
I check for 3 critical vulnerability patterns unique to TON. For detailed detection patterns, code examples, mitigations, and testing strategies, see [VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md](resources/VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md).
### Pattern Summary:
1. **Missing Sender Check** ⚠️ CRITICAL - No sender validation on privileged operations
2. **Integer Overflow** ⚠️ CRITICAL - Unchecked arithmetic in FunC
3. **Improper Gas Handling** ⚠️ HIGH - Insufficient gas reservations
For complete vulnerability patterns with code examples, see [VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md](resources/VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md).
## 5. Scanning Workflow
### Step 1: Platform Identification
1. Verify FunC language (`.fc` or `.func` files)
2. Check for TON Blueprint or toncli project structure
3. Locate contract source files
4. Identify Jetton-related contracts
### Step 2: Boolean Logic Review
```bash
# Find boolean-like variables
rg "int.*is_|int.*has_|int.*flag|int.*enabled" contracts/
# Check for positive integers used as booleans
rg "= 1;|return 1;" contracts/ | grep -E "is_|has_|flag|enabled|valid"
# Look for NOT operations on boolean-like values
rg "~.*\(|~ " contracts/
For each boolean:
- Uses -1 for true, 0 for false
- NOT using 1 or other positive integers
- Logic operations work correctly
Step 3: Jetton Handler Analysis
# Find transfer_notification handlers
rg "transfer_notification|op::transfer_notification" contracts/
For each Jetton handler:
- Validates sender address
- Sender checked against stored Jetton wallet address
- Cannot trust forward_payload without sender validation
- Has admin function to set Jetton wallet address
Step 4: Gas/Forward Amount Review
# Find forward amount usage
rg "forward_ton_amount|forward_amount" contracts/
rg "load_coins\(\)" contracts/
# Find send_raw_message calls
rg "send_raw_message" contracts/
For each outgoing message:
- Forward amounts are fixed/bounded
- OR user-provided amounts validated against msg_value
- Cannot drain contract balance
- Appropriate send_raw_message flags used
Step 5: Manual Review
TON contracts require thorough manual review:
- Boolean logic with
~,&,|operators - Message parsing and validation
- Gas economics and fee calculations
- Storage operations and data serialization
6. Reporting Format
Finding Template
## [CRITICAL] Fake Jetton Contract - Missing Sender Validation
**Location**: `contracts/staking.fc:85-95` (recv_internal, transfer_notification handler)
**Description**:
The `transfer_notification` operation handler does not validate that the sender is the expected Jetton wallet contract. Any attacker can send a fake `transfer_notification` message claiming to have transferred tokens, crediting themselves without actually depositing any Jettons.
**Vulnerable Code**:
```func
// staking.fc, line 85
if (op == op::transfer_notification) {
int jetton_amount = in_msg_body~load_coins();
slice from_user = in_msg_body~load_msg_addr();
;; WRONG: No validation of sender_address!
;; Attacker can claim any jetton_amount
credit_user(from_user, jetton_amount);
}
Attack Scenario:
- Attacker deploys malicious contract
- Malicious contract sends
transfer_notificationmessage to staking contract - Message claims attacker transferred 1,000,000 Jettons
- Staking contract credits attacker without checking sender
- Attacker can now withdraw from contract or gain benefits without depositing
Proof of Concept:
// Attacker sends fake transfer_notification
const attackerContract = await blockchain.treasury("attacker");
await stakingContract.sendInternalMessage(attackerContract.getSender(), {
op: OP_CODES.TRANSFER_NOTIFICATION,
jettonAmount: toNano("1000000"), // Fake amount
fromUser: attackerContract.address,
});
// Attacker successfully credited without sending real Jettons
const balance = await stakingContract.getUserBalance(attackerContract.address);
expect(balance).toEqual(toNano("1000000")); // Attack succeeded
Recommendation: Store expected Jetton wallet address and validate sender:
global slice jetton_wallet_address;
() recv_internal(...) impure {
load_data(); ;; Load jetton_wallet_address from storage
slice cs = in_msg_full.begin_parse();
int flags = cs~load_uint(4);
slice sender_address = cs~load_msg_addr();
int op = in_msg_body~load_uint(32);
if (op == op::transfer_notification) {
;; CRITICAL: Validate sender
throw_unless(error::wrong_jetton_wallet,
equal_slices(sender_address, jetton_wallet_address));
int jetton_amount = in_msg_body~load_coins();
slice from_user = in_msg_body~load_msg_addr();
;; Safe to credit user
credit_user(from_user, jetton_amount);
}
}
References:
- building-secure-contracts/not-so-smart-contracts/ton/fake_jetton_contract
---
## 7. Priority Guidelines
### Critical (Immediate Fix Required)
- Fake Jetton contract (unauthorized minting/crediting)
### High (Fix Before Launch)
- Integer as boolean (logic errors, broken conditions)
- Forward TON without gas check (balance drainage)
---
## 8. Testing Recommendations
### Unit Tests
```typescript
import { Blockchain } from "@ton/sandbox";
import { toNano } from "ton-core";
describe("Security tests", () => {
let blockchain: Blockchain;
let contract: Contract;
beforeEach(async () => {
blockchain = await Blockchain.create();
contract = blockchain.openContract(await Contract.fromInit());
});
it("should use correct boolean values", async () => {
// Test that TRUE = -1, FALSE = 0
const result = await contract.getFlag();
expect(result).toEqual(-1n); // True
expect(result).not.toEqual(1n); // Not 1!
});
it("should reject fake jetton transfer", async () => {
const attacker = await blockchain.treasury("attacker");
const result = await contract.send(
attacker.getSender(),
{ value: toNano("0.05") },
{
$$type: "TransferNotification",
query_id: 0n,
amount: toNano("1000"),
from: attacker.address,
}
);
expect(result.transactions).toHaveTransaction({
success: false, // Should reject
});
});
it("should validate gas for forward amount", async () => {
const result = await contract.send(
user.getSender(),
{ value: toNano("0.01") }, // Insufficient gas
{
$$type: "Transfer",
to: recipient.address,
forward_ton_amount: toNano("1"), // Trying to forward 1 TON
}
);
expect(result.transactions).toHaveTransaction({
success: false,
});
});
});
Integration Tests
// Test with real Jetton wallet
it("should accept transfer from real jetton wallet", async () => {
// Deploy actual Jetton minter and wallet
const jettonMinter = await blockchain.openContract(JettonMinter.create());
const userJettonWallet = await jettonMinter.getWalletAddress(user.address);
// Set jetton wallet in contract
await contract.setJettonWallet(userJettonWallet);
// Real transfer from Jetton wallet
const result = await userJettonWallet.sendTransfer(
user.getSender(),
contract.address,
toNano("100"),
{}
);
expect(result.transactions).toHaveTransaction({
to: contract.address,
success: true,
});
});
9. Additional Resources
- Building Secure Contracts:
building-secure-contracts/not-so-smart-contracts/ton/ - TON Documentation: https://docs.ton.org/
- FunC Documentation: https://docs.ton.org/develop/func/overview
- TON Blueprint: https://github.com/ton-org/blueprint
- Jetton Standard: https://github.com/ton-blockchain/TEPs/blob/master/text/0074-jettons-standard.md
10. Quick Reference Checklist
Before completing TON contract audit:
Boolean Logic (HIGH):
- All boolean values use -1 (true) and 0 (false)
- NO positive integers (1, 2, etc.) used as booleans
- Functions returning booleans return -1 for true
- Boolean logic with
~,&,|uses correct values - Tests verify boolean operations work correctly
Jetton Security (CRITICAL):
-
transfer_notificationhandler validates sender address - Sender checked against stored Jetton wallet address
- Jetton wallet address stored during initialization
- Admin function to set/update Jetton wallet
- Cannot trust forward_payload without sender validation
- Tests with fake Jetton contracts verify rejection
Gas & Forward Amounts (HIGH):
- Forward TON amounts are fixed/bounded
- OR user-provided amounts validated:
msg_value >= tx_fee + forward_amount - Contract balance protected from drainage
- Appropriate
send_raw_messageflags used - Tests verify cannot drain contract with excessive forward amounts
Testing:
- Unit tests for all three vulnerability types
- Integration tests with real Jetton contracts
- Gas cost analysis for all operations
- Testnet deployment before mainnet
先判断是否适合
作者设计意图
作者的方法与取舍
边界和复核