version: "1.0.0" name: pentest-reporting description: Use when turning security findings into a clear, actionable report — scoring severity with CVSS, writing findings with reproduction and impact, prioritizing remediation, producing an executive summary, and tracking retests to closure. The phase that makes testing matter.

Pentest Reporting (REPORT phase — the end that makes the work count)

Overview

A vulnerability nobody fixes isn't security. This phase converts raw findings into a report that engineers can act on and leaders can prioritize: consistent severity, crisp reproduction, honest impact, concrete fixes, and tracked closure.

Core principle: Write for two readers at once — an executive who needs risk and priority, and an engineer who needs exact steps to reproduce and fix.

Structure of a good report

1. Executive summary — plain-language risk posture, top 3–5 risks, overall verdict. No jargon.
2. Scope & methodology — what was tested, environment, dates, what was out of scope.
3. Findings — one entry each (see template), ordered by severity.
4. Remediation roadmap — prioritized fix list with effort estimates.
5. Retest results — status per finding after fixes (Open / Fixed / Risk-accepted).
6. Appendix — tools, raw evidence, references.

Finding template (use for every issue)

Title:        <Concise, e.g. "IDOR in /api/invoices exposes other users' billing">
Severity:     Critical | High | Medium | Low | Info   (CVSS x.x — vector)
Affected:     <endpoint / file:line / component>
Summary:      <1–2 sentences: what's wrong and why it matters>
Reproduction: <numbered, copy-pasteable steps / exact request>
Evidence:     <response excerpt / screenshot, real data redacted>
Impact:       <business consequence: data exposed, money, accounts, scope>
Remediation:  <specific fix, link to security-hardening pattern>
Status:       Open | Fixed (retested <date>) | Risk-accepted

Severity & CVSS

Score consistently so priorities are defensible. See references/cvss-and-template.md for the CVSS v3.1 metrics, a base-score cheat sheet, and a full report skeleton.

Adjust for business context: a "Medium" on the payment path may be a "High" for you.

Writing rules

• Reproducible or it didn't happen — steps a developer can paste and rerun.
• Impact in business terms — "any user can read all invoices," not "missing authz check."
• One fix per finding — point to the exact security-hardening pattern.
• No fear, no fluff — accurate severity; over-hyping burns trust, under-hyping gets ignored.
• Redact real data in evidence.

Retest & closure

For each fixed finding: rerun the original PoC, record pass/fail and date, set status. The report isn't done until every High+ is Fixed or explicitly Risk-accepted by an owner.

Hand-off

Findings come from all FIND/EXPLOIT skills; fixes from `security-hardening`; this skill packages and tracks them to closure (retest each High+ before marking it fixed).

Common mistakes

• Dumping scanner output as "the report" — triage, dedupe, and verify first.
• Severity by gut feel — use CVSS + business context so priorities hold up.
• Reproduction steps that only you can follow — write for a stranger.
• No retest — "fixed" without rerunning the exploit is a guess.