wrdn-authz

Trace authorization paths to report permission boundary bypasses.

56|3|Updated Apr 24, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/getsentry/warden-skills --skill wrdn-authz
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: wrdn-authz
Source: https://github.com/getsentry/warden-skills/tree/main/skills/wrdn-authz
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/getsentry/warden-skills --skill wrdn-authz

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Authorization defects in code changes where a caller bypasses a permission boundary due to IDOR, missing ownership or tenant scoping, role checks that fail open, mass assignment, or token/session claims trusted for decisions.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Trace-first investigation workflow that reads the full function, route, and data path to prove or disprove a bypass.
  • Guides reviewers to check middleware, decorators, routers, and permission logic across frameworks; loads framework-specific references when needed.
  • Use when asked to review route handlers, middleware, decorators, resolvers, RBAC/ACL logic, serializers, ORM queries, token-derived scopes, or admin surfaces.

Quick Start

Review a diff for authorization boundaries and run wrdn-authz to surface potential defects in code paths handling authentication context and permission checks.

Frequently Asked Questions about wrdn-authz

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I find IDOR and authorization bypass defects in route handlers?

To find authorization bypass defects, trace the effective authentication context, authorization decision, and data path to confirm a real bypass. This process checks route handlers, middleware, decorators, and ORM queries for mis-scoped data or missing ownership boundaries.

What is an authorization defect caused by missing tenant scoping?

An authorization defect from missing tenant scoping occurs when a caller bypasses a permission boundary due to mis-scoped data. It involves tracing token-derived scopes and RBAC logic to verify that permission checks do not fail open or trust unverified session claims.

How do I review a code diff for mass assignment and role check vulnerabilities?

Review a code diff for mass assignment and role check vulnerabilities by analyzing route handlers, serializers, and resolvers. You must trace the full function and data path to prove or disprove a bypass in the authentication context and permission logic.

Does this authorization analysis work with RBAC logic and ORM queries across frameworks?

Yes, this authorization analysis works with RBAC logic and ORM queries across frameworks. It guides reviewers to check middleware, decorators, routers, and permission logic, loading framework-specific references when needed to surface token-derived scope bypasses.

When should I check token-derived scopes for access control vulnerabilities?

You should check token-derived scopes for access control vulnerabilities when reviewing admin surfaces and resolvers. The trace-first investigation workflow reads the full route and data path to confirm if session claims are improperly trusted for authorization decisions.

Why does tracing the full data path prevent false positives in access control reviews?

Tracing the full data path prevents false positives in access control reviews by requiring confirmation of a real bypass before reporting. It reads the complete function, route, and data path to disprove missing ownership boundaries or failing open in RBAC checks.