Skip to content

data: scan corpus refresh — 2026-07-05#35

Open
cloakmaster wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/scan-corpus-2026-07-05
Open

data: scan corpus refresh — 2026-07-05#35
cloakmaster wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/scan-corpus-2026-07-05

Conversation

@cloakmaster

@cloakmaster cloakmaster commented Jul 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Scanned merlvintan/damn-vulnerable-llm-agent (2 findings, both HIGH; governance score 27/100; EU AI Act readiness: PARTIAL). Both findings are SQL injection via LLM-generated query in transaction_db.py. Framework detected: LangChain.

First attempt on szybnev/DVLA failed (400 no_agent_code — no LLM agent code detected); scan-corpus-failures.json created to track it. Fell through to merlvintan/damn-vulnerable-llm-agent per routine failure-handling rules.

Corpus now at 3 total scans, 11 findings observed, average governance score 19.67/100.


Generated by Claude Code


Summary by cubic

Refreshes the public scan corpus with a new scan for merlvintan/damn-vulnerable-llm-agent (2 HIGH SQL injection), updates aggregates to 3 scans/11 findings/avg governance 19.67, and adds frameworks_covered: ["langchain"]. Adds data/scan-corpus-failures.json to log failed attempts and records the szybnev/DVLA 400 no_agent_code event.

Written for commit 641fb6a. Summary will update on new commits.

Review in cubic

Add merlvintan/damn-vulnerable-llm-agent scan (2 findings, governance 27/100).
Log szybnev/DVLA failure (no_agent_code). Recompute aggregates (3 total scans).
First attempt on szybnev/DVLA returned 400 no_agent_code; fell through to
merlvintan/damn-vulnerable-llm-agent as second target per routine rules.

@cubic-dev-ai cubic-dev-ai Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

1 issue found across 2 files

Prompt for AI agents (unresolved issues)

Check if these issues are valid — if so, understand the root cause of each and fix them. If appropriate, use sub-agents to investigate and fix each issue separately.


<file name="data/scan-corpus.json">

<violation number="1" location="data/scan-corpus.json:18">
P2: The `frameworks_covered` aggregate cannot be recomputed or validated from the individual `scans[]` entries because no per-scan `framework` field exists. Every other aggregate (`total_scans`, `total_findings_observed`, `average_governance_score`, `finding_categories_aggregated`) maps to fields present in each scan record. Adding a non-derivable aggregate creates silent drift risk and breaks the data-integrity contract described in the README, which says aggregates are recomputed on every refresh.

Consider adding a `framework` (or `frameworks_detected`) field to each scan entry so the aggregate is deterministic and auditable, or remove the aggregate until per-scan data is available.</violation>
</file>

Reply with feedback, questions, or to request a fix.

Re-trigger cubic

Comment thread data/scan-corpus.json
"code_injection"
],
"last_refreshed": "2026-05-10T19:35:03Z",
"frameworks_covered": [

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2: The frameworks_covered aggregate cannot be recomputed or validated from the individual scans[] entries because no per-scan framework field exists. Every other aggregate (total_scans, total_findings_observed, average_governance_score, finding_categories_aggregated) maps to fields present in each scan record. Adding a non-derivable aggregate creates silent drift risk and breaks the data-integrity contract described in the README, which says aggregates are recomputed on every refresh.

Consider adding a framework (or frameworks_detected) field to each scan entry so the aggregate is deterministic and auditable, or remove the aggregate until per-scan data is available.

Prompt for AI agents
Check if this issue is valid — if so, understand the root cause and fix it. At data/scan-corpus.json, line 18:

<comment>The `frameworks_covered` aggregate cannot be recomputed or validated from the individual `scans[]` entries because no per-scan `framework` field exists. Every other aggregate (`total_scans`, `total_findings_observed`, `average_governance_score`, `finding_categories_aggregated`) maps to fields present in each scan record. Adding a non-derivable aggregate creates silent drift risk and breaks the data-integrity contract described in the README, which says aggregates are recomputed on every refresh.

Consider adding a `framework` (or `frameworks_detected`) field to each scan entry so the aggregate is deterministic and auditable, or remove the aggregate until per-scan data is available.</comment>

<file context>
@@ -15,7 +15,10 @@
       "code_injection"
     ],
-    "last_refreshed": "2026-05-10T19:35:03Z",
+    "frameworks_covered": [
+      "langchain"
+    ],
</file context>

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant