SkillAgentSearch skills...

offensive-windows-boundaries

Windows security boundary taxonomy and attack surface enumeration: kernel/user boundary, sandbox boundaries (LPAC, AppContainer), COM/RPC boundaries, hypervisor boundary, trust level transitions.

Install / Use

npx skills add SnailSploit/Claude-Red --skill offensive-windows-boundaries

Installs into whichever agent you are using.

About this skill
📄

SKILL.md

Installable skill definition

Quality Score

87/100

Category

Security

Supported Platforms

Universal

Our assessment of offensive-windows-boundaries

offensive-windows-boundaries scores 87/100 on our quality scale, 422nd of 653 Security skills we index.

Its SKILL.md is 542 KB long, well organised into 220 sections with 74 code examples: long enough that it reads more like full documentation than a focused instruction file, which agents can find harder to follow.

With 6,850 GitHub stars, it is one of the more widely adopted skills in the catalogue.

Substance
21/30
Structure
20/20
Description
15/15
Adoption
16/20
Freshness
15/15

Maintenance, license and trust

  • The repository was last updated 6 days ago, so offensive-windows-boundaries is actively maintained.
  • It is released under the MIT license, a permissive license that allows use, modification and commercial use with attribution.
  • Its trust signals score 100/100, with no cautions. These come from repository metadata, not a code audit — read the skill file before letting an agent act on it.

offensive-windows-boundaries compared with similar skills

All 4 of these similar skills score higher than offensive-windows-boundaries; compare them before choosing.

SkillScoreStarsUpdatedFormat
offensive-windows-boundaries (this skill)by SnailSploit876.8k6d agoSKILL.md
Agent-Reachby Panniantong10085.5k11d agoCLAUDE.md
algorithmic-artby anthropics100177.9k4d agoSKILL.md
pptxby anthropics100177.9k4d agoSKILL.md
designby nextlevelbuilder100130.2k5d agoSKILL.md

Frequently asked questions

How do I install offensive-windows-boundaries?
Run npx skills add SnailSploit/Claude-Red --skill offensive-windows-boundaries. The install tabs above show the steps for each supported agent.
Which AI agents does offensive-windows-boundaries work with?
It is written for Universal, as a SKILL.md file. Other agents that read the same format can often use it too.
Is offensive-windows-boundaries safe to use?
It is MIT-licensed and scores 100/100 on trust signals. Skills are instructions an agent will follow, so read the file before installing it and do not approve commands you do not understand.
Is offensive-windows-boundaries still maintained?
The repository was last updated 6 days ago, so offensive-windows-boundaries is actively maintained.

SKILL: Week 7: Defeating Windows Security Boundaries

Metadata

  • Skill Name: windows-boundaries
  • Folder: offensive-windows-boundaries
  • Source: https://github.com/SnailSploit/offensive-checklist/blob/main/7-windows-boundaries.md

Description

Windows security boundary taxonomy and attack surface enumeration: kernel/user boundary, sandbox boundaries (LPAC, AppContainer), COM/RPC boundaries, hypervisor boundary, trust level transitions. Use when planning privilege escalation paths, sandbox escapes, or understanding Windows security architecture.

Trigger Phrases

Use this skill when the conversation involves any of: Windows boundaries, security boundary, kernel user boundary, sandbox escape, AppContainer, LPAC, COM boundary, RPC boundary, hypervisor, Hyper-V, privilege escalation, trust level

Instructions for Claude

When this skill is active:

  1. Load and apply the full methodology below as your operational checklist
  2. Follow steps in order unless the user specifies otherwise
  3. For each technique, consider applicability to the current target/context
  4. Track which checklist items have been completed
  5. Suggest next steps based on findings

Full Methodology

Week 7: Defeating Windows Security Boundaries

Overview

created by AnotherOne from @Pwn3rzs Telegram channel.

Week 6 taught you how mitigations work defensively. You'll learn to bypass the OS security policies and features that prevent your code from running, your processes from accessing protected resources, and your actions from being logged. This is distinct from Week 8, which teaches you how to bypass exploit mitigations (DEP, ASLR, CFG) once your code is already running.

Week 7 vs Week 8 - The Key Distinction:

  • Week 7 answers: "Can my code execute at all?" - bypass AMSI, WDAC, ASR, AppContainers, integrity levels, PPL, ETW telemetry
  • Week 8 answers: "Can my exploit succeed?" - bypass DEP, ASLR, stack cookies, CFG/XFG, heap safe-unlinking

This Week's Focus:

  • Offensive reconnaissance and mitigation fingerprinting
  • AMSI bypass and script-based attack techniques
  • Protected Process Light (PPL) exploitation
  • Sandbox, integrity level, and AppContainer bypass
  • WDAC and Attack Surface Reduction (ASR) bypass
  • ETW manipulation and telemetry blinding
  • Kernel driver interaction fundamentals (preparation for Week 11)

Prerequisites:

  • Completed Week 6: Understanding Modern Windows Mitigations
  • Week 5: Basic exploitation techniques (stack overflow, ROP, heap)
  • Familiarity with WinDbg, x64dbg, and IDA/Ghidra
  • C/C++, Python, and assembly knowledge

Week 7 Deliverables

By the end of this week, you should have completed:

  • [ ] Recon Tool: Built a mitigation fingerprinting tool
  • [ ] AMSI Bypass: Implemented working AMSI bypass techniques
  • [ ] PPL Research: Documented PPL bypass vectors
  • [ ] Sandbox Escape: Bypassed AppContainer or integrity level restrictions
  • [ ] WDAC/ASR Bypass: Demonstrated at least one WDAC and one ASR bypass
  • [ ] ETW Blinding: Implemented ETW provider patching to suppress telemetry
  • [ ] Driver IOCTL Lab: Loaded a test driver, sent an IOCTL, set a kernel breakpoint (Week 11 prep)

Day 1: Offensive Reconnaissance & Mitigation Fingerprinting

Deliverables

  • [ ] Build a comprehensive mitigation scanner
  • [ ] Fingerprint process-level protections remotely
  • [ ] Identify unprotected/legacy binaries on target
  • [ ] Map kernel mitigation status

Target Mitigation Landscape

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│              Offensive Reconnaissance: What to Enumerate        │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                                 │
│  SYSTEM-LEVEL                    PROCESS-LEVEL                  │
│  ─────────────                   ─────────────                  │
│  ┌──────────────┐               ┌──────────────┐                │
│  │ VBS/HVCI     │               │ DEP/NX       │                │
│  │ WDAC/CI      │               │ ASLR         │                │
│  │ Secure Boot  │               │ CFG/XFG      │                │
│  │ Credential   │               │ CET/Shadow   │                │
│  │   Guard      │               │ ACG          │                │
│  │ KDP          │               │ CIG          │                │
│  │ KASLR        │               │ Child Process│                │
│  └──────────────┘               └──────────────┘                │
│         │                              │                        │
│         ▼                              ▼                        │
│  Determines:                    Determines:                     │
│  - Kernel exploit              - Shellcode execution            │
│    feasibility                 - Code injection                 │
│  - Driver loading              - ROP requirements               │
│  - Credential theft            - Process hollowing              │
│                                                                 │
│  ATTACK SURFACE MAPPING                                         │
│  ─────────────────────                                          │
│  ├── Unprotected legacy binaries (no ASLR/DEP)                  │
│  ├── Signed but vulnerable drivers (BYOVD)                      │
│  ├── Processes running without ACG/CFG                          │
│  └── Kernel version -> known vulnerabilities                    │
│                                                                 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Mitigation Scanner

This scanner enumerates security boundaries on a Windows target. Why this matters: Before exploiting a target, you need to know which mitigations are active.

// unified_recon.c
// Combines system, process, binary, and policy analysis
// Compile: cl src\unified_recon.c /Fe:bin\unified_recon.exe advapi32.lib

#include <windows.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <tlhelp32.h>

// PE DLL Characteristics flags
#define IMAGE_DLLCHARACTERISTICS_HIGH_ENTROPY_VA    0x0020
#define IMAGE_DLLCHARACTERISTICS_DYNAMIC_BASE       0x0040
#define IMAGE_DLLCHARACTERISTICS_NX_COMPAT          0x0100
#define IMAGE_DLLCHARACTERISTICS_NO_SEH             0x0400
#define IMAGE_DLLCHARACTERISTICS_GUARD_CF           0x4000

void CheckSystemMitigations() {
    printf("\n=== SYSTEM-LEVEL MITIGATIONS ===\n\n");

    // Check VBS/HVCI via registry (more reliable than WMI)
    printf("[*] Checking VBS/HVCI status...\n");
    HKEY hKey;
    DWORD vbsEnabled = 0, hvciEnabled = 0;
    DWORD size = sizeof(DWORD);

    if (RegOpenKeyExA(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE,
        "SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\DeviceGuard", 0, KEY_READ, &hKey) == ERROR_SUCCESS) {
        RegQueryValueExA(hKey, "EnableVirtualizationBasedSecurity", NULL, NULL, (LPBYTE)&vbsEnabled, &size);
        RegCloseKey(hKey);
    }

    if (RegOpenKeyExA(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE,
        "SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\DeviceGuard\\Scenarios\\HypervisorEnforcedCodeIntegrity",
        0, KEY_READ, &hKey) == ERROR_SUCCESS) {
        RegQueryValueExA(hKey, "Enabled", NULL, NULL, (LPBYTE)&hvciEnabled, &size);
        RegCloseKey(hKey);
    }

    printf("    VBS: %s\n", vbsEnabled ? "ENABLED" : "Disabled");
    printf("    HVCI: %s\n", hvciEnabled ? "ENABLED" : "Disabled");

    if (hvciEnabled) {
        printf("    [!] HVCI blocks unsigned kernel drivers\n");
        printf("    [*] Attack: Need signed vulnerable driver (BYOVD)\n");
    } else {
        printf("    [+] HVCI disabled - unsigned drivers can load\n");
    }

    // Check Secure Boot via firmware variable
    printf("\n[*] Checking Secure Boot...\n");
    DWORD secureBootEnabled = 0;
    size = sizeof(DWORD);
    if (RegOpenKeyExA(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE,
        "SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\SecureBoot\\State",
        0, KEY_READ, &hKey) == ERROR_SUCCESS) {
        RegQueryValueExA(hKey, "UEFISecureBootEnabled", NULL, NULL, (LPBYTE)&secureBootEnabled, &size);
        RegCloseKey(hKey);
        printf("    Secure Boot: %s\n", secureBootEnabled ? "ENABLED" : "Disabled");
    } else {
        printf("    Secure Boot: Unable to determine (may not be UEFI)\n");
    }

    // Check KASLR status (kernel base randomization)
    printf("\n[*] Checking KASLR (kernel base varies per boot)...\n");
    printf("    Note: KASLR leaks restricted in Win 24H2+ without SeDebugPrivilege\n");
    printf("    KASLR is enabled by default on modern Windows\n");

    // Check Credential Guard
    printf("\n[*] Checking Credential Guard...\n");
    DWORD credGuard = 0;
    size = sizeof(DWORD);
    if (RegOpenKeyExA(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE,
        "SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\Lsa", 0, KEY_READ, &hKey) == ERROR_SUCCESS) {
        RegQueryValueExA(hKey, "LsaCfgFlags", NULL, NULL, (LPBYTE)&credGuard, &size);
        RegCloseKey(hKey);

        if (credGuard & 1) {
            printf("    Credential Guard: ENABLED\n");
            printf("    [!] Mimikatz credential dumping will FAIL\n");
        } else {
            printf("    Credential Guard: Disabled\n");
            printf("    [+] Mimikatz can dump credentials\n");
        }
    }
}

void CheckProcessMitigations(DWORD pid, const char* procName) {
    HANDLE hProcess = OpenProcess(PROCESS_QUERY_INFORMATION, FALSE, pid);
    if (!hProcess) return;

    printf("\n[%s (PID: %d)]\n", procName, pid);

    // DEP
    PROCESS_MITIGATION_DEP_POLICY depPolicy = {0};
    if (GetProcessMitigationPolicy(hProcess, ProcessDEPPolicy, &depPolicy, sizeof(depPolicy))) {
        printf("  DEP: %s%s\n",
            depPolicy.Enable ? "ON" : "OFF",
            depPolicy.Permanent ? " (Permanent)" : "");
    }

    // ASLR
    PROCESS_MITIGATION_ASLR_POLICY aslrPolicy = {0};
    if (GetProcessMitigationPolicy(hProcess, ProcessASLRPolicy, &aslrPolicy, sizeof(aslrPolicy))) {
        printf("  ASLR: BottomUp=%d HighEntropy=%d ForceRelocate=%d\n",
            aslrPolicy.EnableBottomUpRandomization,
            aslrPolicy.EnableHighEntropy,
            aslrPolicy.EnableForceRelocateImages);
    }

    // ACG (Dynamic Code)
    PROCESS_MITIGATION_DYNAMIC_CODE_POLICY acgPolicy = {0};
    if (GetProcessMitigationPolicy(hProcess, ProcessDynamicCodePolicy, &acgPolicy, sizeof(acgPolicy))) {
        printf("  ACG: %s\n", acgPolicy.ProhibitDynamicCode ? "ON (No dynamic code)" : "OFF");
    }

    // CFG
    PROCESS_MITIGATION_CONTROL_FLOW_GUARD_POLICY cfgPolicy = {0};
    if (GetProcessMitigationPolicy(hProcess, ProcessControl

Truncated for display — read the full file on GitHub.

Related Skills

View on GitHub
GitHub Stars6.8k
CategorySecurity
Updated6d ago
Forks896

Languages

Python

Trust signals

100/100

From repository metadata: license, adoption, age and documentation. Not a code audit — see the Safety scan above for what the skill file itself contains.

No cautions