solana-vulnerability-scanner
This Claude Code skill systematically scans Solana and Anchor framework programs for six critical security vulnerabilities including arbitrary cross-program invocations, improper program-derived address validation, missing signer and ownership checks, and sysvar spoofing attacks. Use this skill when auditing Solana programs before launch, reviewing account validation logic, assessing cross-program invocation patterns, or performing security assessments of blockchain protocols built on Solana.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/trailofbits/skills /tmp/solana-vulnerability-scanner && cp -r /tmp/solana-vulnerability-scanner/plugins/building-secure-contracts/skills/solana-vulnerability-scanner ~/.claude/skills/solana-vulnerability-scannerSKILL.md
# Solana Vulnerability Scanner
## 1. Purpose
Systematically scan Solana programs (native and Anchor framework) for platform-specific security vulnerabilities related to cross-program invocations, account validation, and program-derived addresses. This skill encodes 6 critical vulnerability patterns unique to Solana's account model.
## 2. When to Use This Skill
- Auditing Solana programs (native Rust or Anchor)
- Reviewing cross-program invocation (CPI) logic
- Validating program-derived address (PDA) implementations
- Pre-launch security assessment of Solana protocols
- Reviewing account validation patterns
- Assessing instruction introspection logic
## 3. Platform Detection
### File Extensions & Indicators
- **Rust files**: `.rs`
### Language/Framework Markers
```rust
// Native Solana program indicators
use solana_program::{
account_info::AccountInfo,
entrypoint,
entrypoint::ProgramResult,
pubkey::Pubkey,
program::invoke,
program::invoke_signed,
};
entrypoint!(process_instruction);
// Anchor framework indicators
use anchor_lang::prelude::*;
#[program]
pub mod my_program {
pub fn initialize(ctx: Context<Initialize>) -> Result<()> {
// Program logic
}
}
#[derive(Accounts)]
pub struct Initialize<'info> {
#[account(mut)]
pub authority: Signer<'info>,
}
// Common patterns
AccountInfo, Pubkey
invoke(), invoke_signed()
Signer<'info>, Account<'info>
#[account(...)] with constraints
seeds, bump
```
### Project Structure
- `programs/*/src/lib.rs` - Program implementation
- `Anchor.toml` - Anchor configuration
- `Cargo.toml` with `solana-program` or `anchor-lang`
- `tests/` - Program tests
### Tool Support
- **Trail of Bits Solana Lints**: Rust linters for Solana
- Installation: Add to Cargo.toml
- **anchor test**: Built-in testing framework
- **Solana Test Validator**: Local testing environment
---
## 4. How This Skill Works
When invoked, I will:
1. **Search your codebase** for Solana/Anchor programs
2. **Analyze each program** for the 6 vulnerability patterns
3. **Report findings** with file references and severity, above them a coverage table carrying a verdict for every pattern
4. **Provide fixes** for each identified issue
5. **Check account validation** and CPI security
---
## 5. Example Output
---
## 6. Vulnerability Patterns (6 Patterns)
I check for 6 critical vulnerability patterns unique to Solana. For detailed detection patterns, code examples, mitigations, and testing strategies, see [VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md](resources/VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md).
### Pattern Summary:
1. **Arbitrary CPI** ⚠️ CRITICAL - User-controlled program IDs in CPI calls
2. **Improper PDA Validation** ⚠️ CRITICAL - Using create_program_address without canonical bump
3. **Missing Ownership Check** ⚠️ HIGH - Deserializing accounts without owner validation
4. **Missing Signer Check** ⚠️ CRITICAL - Authority operations without is_signer check
5. **Sysvar Account Check** ⚠️ HIGH - Spoofed sysvar accounts (pre-Solana 1.8.1)
6. **Improper Instruction Introspection** ⚠️ MEDIUM - Absolute indexes allowing reuse
For complete vulnerability patterns with code examples, see [VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md](resources/VULNERABILITY_PATTERNS.md).
## 7. Scanning Workflow
### Step 1: Platform Identification
1. Verify Solana program (native or Anchor)
2. Check Solana version (1.8.1+ for sysvar security)
3. Locate program source (`programs/*/src/lib.rs`)
4. Identify framework (native vs Anchor)
### Step 2: CPI Security Review
```bash
# Find all CPI calls
rg "invoke\(|invoke_signed\(" programs/
# Check for program ID validation before each
# Should see program ID checks immediately before invoke
```
For each CPI:
- [ ] Program ID validated before invocation
- [ ] Cannot pass user-controlled program accounts
- [ ] Anchor: Uses `Program<'info, T>` type
### Step 3: PDA Validation Check
```bash
# Find PDA usage
rg "find_program_address|create_program_address" programs/
rg "seeds.*bump" programs/
# Anchor: Check for seeds constraints
rg "#\[account.*seeds" programs/
```
For each PDA:
- [ ] Uses `find_program_address()` or Anchor `seeds` constraint
- [ ] Bump seed stored and reused
- [ ] Not using user-provided bump
### Step 4: Account Validation Sweep
```bash
# Find account deserialization
rg "try_from_slice|try_deserialize" programs/
# Should see owner checks before deserialization
rg "\.owner\s*==|\.owner\s*!=" programs/
```
For each account used:
- [ ] Owner validated before deserialization
- [ ] Signer check for authority accounts
- [ ] Anchor: Uses `Account<'info, T>` and `Signer<'info>`
### Step 5: Instruction Introspection Review
```bash
# Find instruction introspection usage
rg "load_instruction_at|load_current_index|get_instruction_relative" programs/
# Check for checked versions
rg "load_instruction_at_checked|load_current_index_checked" programs/
```
- [ ] Using checked functions (Solana 1.8.1+)
- [ ] Using relative indexing
- [ ] Proper correlation validation
### Step 6: Trail of Bits Solana Lints
```toml
# Add to Cargo.toml
[dependencies]
solana-program = "1.17" # Use latest version
[lints.clippy]
# Enable Solana-specific lints
# (Trail of Bits solana-lints if available)
```
---
## 8. Reporting Format
### Coverage Table
Report on every pattern in §6, whether or not it turned anything up. Emit this table above the findings, with
all 6 rows present:
| # | Pattern | Verdict | Evidence |
|---|---------|---------|----------|
| 1 | Arbitrary CPI | `n/a` | this program makes no cross-program invocations |
| 2 | Improper PDA Validation | | |
| 3 | Missing Ownership Check | | |
| 4 | Missing Signer Check | | |
| 5 | Sysvar Account Check | | |
| 6 | Improper Instruction Introspection | | |
Each verdict is one of:
- **`found`** — cite `file:line` and write the finding up in full below.
- **`clear`** — the pattern applies to this program and the program handles it. Name the constraint, account
type, or check you searched for, so a reader can rAudits GitHub Actions workflows for security vulnerabilities in AI agent integrations including Claude Code Action, Gemini CLI, OpenAI Codex, and GitHub AI Inference. Detects attack vectors where attacker-controlled input reaches AI agents running in CI/CD pipelines, including env var intermediary patterns, direct expression injection, dangerous sandbox configurations, and wildcard user allowlists. Use when reviewing workflow files that invoke AI coding agents, auditing CI/CD pipeline security for prompt injection risks, or evaluating agentic action configurations.
Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.
Understand a codebase before looking for bugs in it - what each function assumes, what it guarantees, and what it depends on elsewhere. Use when starting an audit, threat model, or architecture review on unfamiliar code, and before any vulnerability-hunting pass.
Scans Algorand smart contracts for 11 common vulnerabilities including rekeying attacks, unchecked transaction fees, missing field validations, and access control issues. Use when auditing Algorand projects (TEAL/PyTeal).
Prepares codebases for security review using Trail of Bits' checklist. Helps set review goals, runs static analysis tools, increases test coverage, removes dead code, ensures accessibility, and generates documentation (flowcharts, user stories, inline comments). Use when preparing your own codebase to be audited by someone else, getting a repository review-ready before an external security review, deciding what to fix before auditors start, or asking what assessors need from a project. For understanding unfamiliar code you are about to audit, use audit-context-building instead.
Scans Cairo/StarkNet smart contracts for 6 critical vulnerabilities including felt252 arithmetic overflow, L1-L2 messaging issues, address conversion problems, and signature replay. Use when auditing StarkNet projects.
Systematic code maturity assessment using Trail of Bits' 9-category framework. Analyzes codebase for arithmetic safety, auditing practices, access controls, complexity, decentralization, documentation, MEV risks, low-level code, and testing, then produces a scorecard with evidence-based ratings and a priority-ordered roadmap. Use when assessing or scoring the maturity of a smart contract or blockchain codebase, producing a maturity scorecard or evaluation, or judging how mature, well-tested, or well-documented such a project is against a rubric.
Scans Cosmos SDK blockchain modules and CosmWasm contracts for consensus-critical vulnerabilities — chain halts, fund loss, state divergence. 25 core + 16 IBC + 10 EVM + 3 CosmWasm patterns. Use when auditing custom x/ modules, reviewing IBC integrations, or assessing pre-launch chain security. Updated for SDK v0.53.x.