Audit de sécurité JavaScript dynamique

VérifiéSûr

Réalise un audit de sécurité complet des dépendances JavaScript chargées dynamiquement dans une application web. Il analyse le codebase à la recherche de patterns d'injection de scripts, d'imports dynamiques, de scripts tiers, d'iframes et de workers, puis évalue les risques liés à la chaîne d'approvisionnement, aux vecteurs XSS et aux bonnes pratiques comme CSP et SRI. Aide les développeurs à identifier et corriger les problèmes de sécurité sans casser les fonctionnalités existantes.

Spar Skills Guide Bot
SecuriteAvancé
7002/06/2026
Claude Code
#security-audit#javascript#dynamic-loading#third-party#csp

Recommandé pour

Notre avis

Cette compétence effectue un audit de sécurité complet des dépendances JavaScript chargées dynamiquement, identifiant les risques et proposant des correctifs.

Points forts

  • Couvre la découverte de tous les modèles de chargement dynamique (balises script, importations dynamiques, iframes, web workers).
  • Évalue les risques de la chaîne d'approvisionnement, XSS, sécurité des iframes et transport.
  • Inclut une checklist de bonnes pratiques pour CSP, SRI et sandboxing.

Limites

  • N'exécute pas de code dynamique, donc peut manquer des scripts générés à l'exécution.
  • Nécessite un accès complet au code source ; limité si seulement une partie est disponible.
  • Peut ne pas détecter toutes les techniques avancées de chargement obscurci.
Quand l'utiliser

À utiliser lors d'un audit de sécurité d'une application web concernant les scripts tiers et dynamiques, surtout avant un déploiement ou une mise en production.

Quand l'éviter

Pas adaptée pour une surveillance en temps réel ou des tests de sécurité dynamiques ; elle est complémentaire à l'analyse dynamique.

Analyse de sécurité

Sûr
Score qualité90/100

The skill is a guide for auditing JavaScript dependency loading and does not contain any instructions that would cause harmful actions, data exfiltration, or execution of destructive commands. It is purely analytical.

Aucun point d'attention détecté

Exemples

Full dynamic JS audit
Run a comprehensive security audit of all dynamically loaded JavaScript in this web application. Identify risks and propose fixes.
Third-party script security check
Audit all third-party JavaScript dependencies loaded dynamically. Check for SRI, CSP, and supply chain risks.

name: dynamic-js-audit description: Auditing dynamically loaded JavaScript

Claude Code Prompt: JavaScript Dependency & Dynamic Loading Security Audit

Purpose

Perform a comprehensive security audit of dynamically loaded JavaScript dependencies in this web application. Identify security risks, check adherence to best practices, and propose non-breaking patches or alternatives.


Instructions

Phase 1: Discovery - Find All Dynamic JavaScript Loading

Scan the entire codebase for dynamically loaded JavaScript. Look for:

1. Script Tag Injection Patterns:

- <script src="..."> tags in HTML files
- document.createElement('script')
- element.innerHTML containing <script>
- document.write() with script content
- insertAdjacentHTML() with scripts

2. Dynamic Import Mechanisms:

- import() dynamic imports
- require() with variable paths
- System.import()
- AMD define() and require()
- Webpack's require.ensure()
- Code splitting chunks

3. External Resource Loading:

- CDN-hosted libraries (cdnjs, jsdelivr, unpkg, etc.)
- Third-party analytics scripts (Google Analytics, Mixpanel, etc.)
- Advertising scripts
- Social media widgets
- Payment processors (Stripe, PayPal SDKs)
- Chat widgets (Intercom, Drift, etc.)
- A/B testing tools

4. Iframe Sources:

- <iframe src="..."> tags
- Dynamically created iframes
- postMessage() communication patterns

5. Web Workers & Service Workers:

- new Worker() instantiations
- Service worker registrations
- Shared workers

For each discovered instance, record:

  • File path and line number
  • The URL/source being loaded
  • Whether it's first-party or third-party
  • Loading context (inline, deferred, async, module)
  • Any existing security measures in place

Phase 2: Security Risk Assessment

Evaluate each dynamically loaded resource against these risk categories:

A. Supply Chain Risks:

  • [ ] Is Subresource Integrity (SRI) used for external scripts?
  • [ ] Are specific versions pinned or using latest/unpinned versions?
  • [ ] Is the CDN/source reputable and unlikely to be compromised?
  • [ ] Could the external resource be self-hosted instead?

B. Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Vectors:

  • [ ] Is user input ever used in script URLs or content?
  • [ ] Are there proper Content Security Policy (CSP) headers?
  • [ ] Is innerHTML/outerHTML used with untrusted content?
  • [ ] Are template literals interpolating external data into scripts?

C. Iframe Security:

  • [ ] Do iframes use the sandbox attribute?
  • [ ] Is allow-scripts granted only when necessary?
  • [ ] Is allow-same-origin combined dangerously with allow-scripts?
  • [ ] Are proper allow feature policies set?
  • [ ] Is the referrerpolicy attribute set appropriately?

D. Protocol & Transport Security:

  • [ ] Are all external resources loaded over HTTPS?
  • [ ] Are there any protocol-relative URLs (//example.com)?
  • [ ] Is mixed content possible?

E. Data Exposure Risks:

  • [ ] Do third-party scripts have access to sensitive DOM content?
  • [ ] Are cookies properly scoped (HttpOnly, Secure, SameSite)?
  • [ ] Is localStorage/sessionStorage accessible to third-party scripts?
  • [ ] Are postMessage handlers validating origin?

Phase 3: Best Practices Checklist

For each category, check implementation status:

Content Security Policy (CSP):

- script-src directive configured
- No 'unsafe-inline' without nonces/hashes
- No 'unsafe-eval' unless absolutely required
- Specific domains whitelisted (no wildcards)
- report-uri configured for monitoring

Subresource Integrity (SRI):

- integrity attribute on all external scripts
- crossorigin="anonymous" set when using SRI
- SRI hashes match current library versions

Iframe Sandboxing:

- sandbox attribute present on all third-party iframes
- Minimal permissions granted (principle of least privilege)
- Feature policy/Permissions-Policy configured

Script Loading Security:

- async/defer used appropriately
- Scripts loaded from trusted origins only
- Fallback mechanisms for CDN failures
- Error handling for failed script loads

postMessage Security:

- Origin validation in all message handlers
- Structured data validation
- No eval() of received messages

Phase 4: Generate Report & Patches

For each identified issue, provide:

1. Issue Description:

  • What the vulnerability/risk is
  • Where it's located (file:line)
  • Severity rating (Critical/High/Medium/Low/Info)
  • Potential impact if exploited

2. Proposed Patch: Provide a code diff showing the fix. Consider:

  • The application's architecture and patterns
  • Existing build tools and workflows
  • Browser compatibility requirements
  • Performance implications
  • Whether the fix might break existing functionality

Format patches as:

// File: path/to/file.js
// Line: XX-YY
// Risk: [severity]

- <original code>
+ <patched code>

3. Explanation:

  • Why the patch works
  • Any trade-offs or considerations
  • Testing recommendations

4. Alternatives (when direct fix isn't possible): If a best practice cannot be directly implemented, suggest:

  • Compensating controls
  • Alternative libraries or approaches
  • Configuration changes
  • Architecture modifications
  • Monitoring/detection strategies as interim measures

Phase 5: Prioritized Remediation Plan

Organize findings into an actionable remediation plan:

  1. Immediate Actions (Critical/High):

    • Issues that could lead to RCE or data exfiltration
    • Missing SRI on widely-used external scripts
    • XSS vectors in script loading
  2. Short-term Improvements (Medium):

    • CSP implementation or hardening
    • Iframe sandboxing gaps
    • Protocol upgrades
  3. Long-term Enhancements (Low/Info):

    • Self-hosting external dependencies
    • Build process improvements
    • Monitoring and alerting setup

Output Format

Structure your response as:

# JavaScript Dependency Security Audit Report

## Executive Summary
[Brief overview of findings and risk posture]

## Discovery Results
[Table of all dynamically loaded scripts/resources found]

## Findings

### [SEVERITY] Finding #1: [Title]
**Location:** `path/to/file.js:XX`
**Description:** [What's wrong]
**Risk:** [Potential impact]

#### Current Code:
\`\`\`javascript
// problematic code
\`\`\`

#### Proposed Patch:
\`\`\`diff
- problematic code
+ fixed code
\`\`\`

#### Explanation:
[Why this fix works and considerations]

#### Alternatives (if applicable):
[Other approaches if the primary fix isn't viable]

---

[Repeat for each finding]

## Remediation Roadmap
[Prioritized list of actions]

## Additional Recommendations
[General hardening suggestions]

Special Considerations

Do NOT:

  • Modify any files directly
  • Propose changes that would break core functionality
  • Suggest removing necessary third-party integrations without alternatives
  • Recommend security measures incompatible with the app's tech stack

DO:

  • Consider the full context of how each script is used
  • Check for existing security measures before flagging issues
  • Provide fallback options for essential functionality
  • Note when manual review is needed for complex cases
  • Consider framework-specific solutions (React, Vue, Angular, etc.)

Begin Audit

Start by exploring the project structure to understand the application architecture, then systematically scan for dynamically loaded JavaScript following the phases above.

Skills similaires