semgrep-custom-rule-writing

star 15

Write custom Semgrep rules to identify organization-specific logic flaws, improper cryptography usage, or missing authorization checks during source code review. This skill focuses on moving beyond default rulesets to locate complex vulnerabilities.

ShulkwiSEC By ShulkwiSEC schedule Updated 6/12/2026

name: semgrep-custom-rule-writing description: > Write custom Semgrep rules to identify organization-specific logic flaws, improper cryptography usage, or missing authorization checks during source code review. This skill focuses on moving beyond default rulesets to locate complex vulnerabilities. domain: cybersecurity subdomain: bug-hunting category: Source Code Analysis difficulty: intermediate estimated_time: "2-4 hours" mitre_attack: tactics: [TA0001, TA0007] techniques: [T1190] platforms: [code] tags: [semgrep, sast, source-code-review, static-analysis, custom-rules, bug-hunting] tools: [semgrep, code-editor] version: "1.0" author: CyberSkills-Elite license: Apache-2.0

Semgrep Custom Rule Writing

When to Use

  • During a white-box penetration test or source code review when looking for bespoke vulnerabilities that generic SAST tools fail to detect.
  • To codify and hunt for organization-specific anti-patterns (e.g., calling an internal API without passing the authentication context).

Prerequisites

  • Authorized scope and target URLs from bug bounty program
  • Burp Suite Professional (or Community) configured with browser proxy
  • Familiarity with OWASP Top 10 and common web vulnerability classes
  • SecLists wordlists for fuzzing and enumeration

Workflow

Phase 1: Understanding Semgrep Patterns

# Concept: Semgrep syntax rules:
  - id: simple-eval-detection
    pattern: eval(...)
    message: "Avoid using eval() as it can lead to code injection."
    languages: [javascript, python]
    severity: ERROR

Phase 2: Utilizing Metavariables

# rules:
  - id: python-exec-with-variable
    pattern: exec($X)
    message: "Using exec() on variable $X is dangerous."
    languages: [python]
    severity: WARNING

Phase 3: Pattern-Inside and Pattern-Not (Contextual Matching)

# rules:
  - id: missing-auth-check-flask
    patterns:
      - pattern-inside: |
          @app.route(...)
          def $FUNC(...):
            ...
      - pattern: return $RENDER(...)
      - pattern-not-inside: |
          @login_required
          def $FUNC(...):
            ...
      - pattern-not-inside: |
          if current_user.is_authenticated:
            ...
    message: "Flask route missing @login_required or explicit authentication check."
    languages: [python]
    severity: ERROR

Phase 4: Testing Rules via Semgrep CLI

# # semgrep --config custom-rules.yml src/

Decision Point ๐Ÿ”€

flowchart TD
    A[Identify Pattern ] --> B{Write Rule ]}
    B -->|Yes| C[Test Rule ]
    B -->|No| D[Refine Scope ]
    C --> E[Execute Scan ]

๐Ÿ”ต Blue Team Detection & Defense

  • CI/CD Integration Pipeline Validation: Centralized Rule Repositories: Developer Education: Key Concepts
    Concept Description

Output Format

Semgrep Custom Rule Writing โ€” Assessment Report
============================================================
Target: [Target identifier]
Assessor: [Operator name]
Date: [Assessment date]
Scope: [Authorized scope]
MITRE ATT&CK: [Relevant technique IDs]

Findings Summary:
  [Finding 1]: [Severity] โ€” [Brief description]
  [Finding 2]: [Severity] โ€” [Brief description]

Detailed Results:
  Phase 1: [Phase name]
    - Result: [Outcome]
    - Evidence: [Screenshot/log reference]
    - Impact: [Business impact assessment]

  Phase 2: [Phase name]
    - Result: [Outcome]
    - Evidence: [Screenshot/log reference]
    - Impact: [Business impact assessment]

Risk Rating: [Critical/High/Medium/Low/Informational]
Recommendations:
  1. [Immediate remediation step]
  2. [Long-term hardening measure]
  3. [Monitoring/detection improvement]

๐Ÿ’ฐ Industry Bounty Payout Statistics (2024-2025)

Company/Platform Total Paid Highest Single Year
Google VRP $17.1M $250,000 (CVE-2025-4609 Chrome sandbox escape) 2025
Microsoft $16.6M (Not disclosed) 2024
Google VRP $11.8M $100,115 (Chrome MiraclePtr Bypass) 2024
HackerOne (all programs) $81M $100,050 (crypto firm) 2025
Meta/Facebook $2.3M up to $300K (mobile code execution) 2024
Crypto.com (HackerOne) $2M program $2M max 2024
1Password (Bugcrowd) $1M max $1M (highest Bugcrowd ever) 2024
Samsung $1M max $1M (critical mobile flaws) 2025

Key Takeaway: Google alone paid $17.1M in 2025 โ€” a 40% increase YoY. Microsoft paid $16.6M. The industry is paying more, not less. Average critical bounty on HackerOne: $3,700 (2023).

๐Ÿ“š Shared Resources

For cross-cutting methodology applicable to all vulnerability classes, see:

References

Install via CLI
npx skills add https://github.com/ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge --skill semgrep-custom-rule-writing
Repository Details
star Stars 15
call_split Forks 4
navigation Branch main
article Path SKILL.md
More from Creator