Flounder Security Auditor

Turns coding agents into an execution-verified white-hat security audit workflow.

Source repo
adshao/flounder
Stars
★ 522
Last updated
13d ago
License
AGPL-3.0
Primary language
TypeScript

At a glance

How it runs
CLIWeb appSelf-hosted service
Works with
Universal · cross-platformCodex · Claude Code
Setup effort
Medium · a few setup steps
You'll need
Node.js 24 LTSDocker or a Docker-compatible runtime, or Apple's container runtimeShell / CLINetwork accessLocal filesystem
Typical use
A protocol or contract team can run a blind audit of public-source or authorized code and assess findings through execution evidence.
Not a fit if
  • Teams that need an audit tool ready to use without setup
  • Teams requiring code and credentials to stay local while using no remote model service
Source review
69/100 · Some gaps

What does this agent do, and when should you use it?

Flounder is an end-to-end security audit system built around modern coding agents, with a CLI, React dashboard, REST API, pi extension, and execution daemon. It can prepare material from a repository, source tree, package, project link, transaction, or address, then map scope, dig into code, compose cross-scope candidates, and verify them through local execution. Model-generated code, PoCs, dependency installs, and tests run in a copied workspace; the default OCI sandbox restricts capabilities and can disable networking for audit commands. The system tracks scopes, evidence, findings, and reports, and its confirmation phase can reproduce findings against real-target ground truth. Flounder is intended for public-source or authorized targets; project code and provider credentials stay on the executor host, while the chosen model provider may require authentication.

With flounder run <clue>, Flounder can prepare target source and materials, then run the map, dig, synthesize, verify, confirm, and report workflow; --source starts directly from staged code. The model reads source and optional project documentation, specifications, and historical materials, creates a scope inventory, and writes and runs PoCs, tests, or harnesses in an isolated workspace. Findings need passing local command evidence; the confirmation phase can reproduce them against a real target or local fork. The CLI, dashboard, and REST API expose run status, scopes, findings, execution evidence, and Markdown reports.

  1. A protocol or contract team can run a blind audit of public-source or authorized code and assess findings through execution evidence.
  2. A bug bounty researcher can use Prepare to collect public project materials, deployments, and scope information, then assess findings against program requirements.
  3. An incident responder can start from a suspicious transaction, address, or incident link and test whether the root cause reproduces against local ground truth.
  4. An auditor can import existing claims or select a file, region, or scope for targeted verification with verify or audit --scope.
  5. A Flounder maintainer can explicitly enable maintainer mode to run constrained candidate experiments based on Evaluation failures.

How do you install or deploy this agent?

Use Node.js 24 LTS. To install from source:

nvm use
npm install
npm run build
npm run sandbox:build

You can also install the Flounder skill for Codex or Claude Code:

npx skills add adshao/flounder --skill flounder -g -a codex -a claude-code

Audit runs need an available sandbox runtime. The default Docker backend needs Docker or a compatible runtime; Apple container is also supported on Apple silicon macOS. Authenticate the chosen model provider on the execution daemon.

How do you use this agent?

Start the control plane and dashboard:

node dist/cli.js ui

Log in to and check the provider on the execution daemon:

flounder daemon provider login openai-codex
flounder daemon provider check openai-codex

Then create a dashboard project, enter an audit task or clue, choose its execution daemon and provider profile, and start a run. To run the full workflow from a clue:

flounder run <tx-or-address-or-project-or-repo-or-link>

To audit local source directly:

flounder run --target my-target --source ./src --build-root . --corpus ./docs

openai-codex uses pi subscription/OAuth authentication. For other providers, configure OAuth or an API key on the execution daemon using the model setup guide.

What are this agent's strengths and limitations?

Pros
  • Uses passing local command evidence to support confirmed findings, with differential confirmation, refutation, and PoC checks in the workflow.
  • Runs model-generated code and tests in a copied workspace by default; the OCI sandbox supports capability limits, a read-only root filesystem, and network isolation.
  • Provides a dashboard, self-describing REST API, pi extension, and daemon execution plane alongside the CLI.
  • Includes Solidity/EVM and ZK audit examples while leaving audit strategy to the model rather than hard-coding those stacks.
Limitations
  • Requires Node.js 24 LTS and several project and sandbox image build steps.
  • Auditing depends on a model provider authenticated on the execution daemon; provider credentials and model-service charges depend on the chosen provider, and repository pricing is unstated.
  • The baseline sandbox does not promise every target compiler, prover, or chain tool; specialized targets may need a custom image.
  • Outside the documented Apple silicon macOS path, the default OCI sandbox depends on Docker or a compatible runtime; runs fail closed when no sandbox is ready.

How does this agent compare with similar options?

Key facts side by side with the most closely related agents.

Agent Source review Form / cost Stars Updated Language Full support on
Flounder Security Auditor This agent 69 · Some gaps CLI ★ 522 13d ago TypeScript Codex · Claude Code
PentesterFlow 73 · Some gaps CLIFree + model costs ★ 1.4k 1mo ago TypeScript OpenAI API
AutoCVE Security Audit Platform 44 · Major gaps Self-hosted serviceFree + model costs ★ 1.2k 1mo ago Python —
HexStrike AI MCP 22 · Major gaps MCP serverFree ★ 13k 2mo ago Python Claude.ai

How does FollowAgents rate this agent?

FollowAgents source review · FARS-2.1
Some gaps
69/ 100 5-point scale 3.5 / 5
Trust 17/29
Reliability 8/14
Adaptability 15/18
Convention 14/18
Effectiveness 10/13
Verifiability 5/8
Why each dimension lost points
Trust17 / 29 · 2.9/5

The materials describe copied workspaces, a default sandbox, capability-scoped network access, credentials kept on the executor, a host-execution escape hatch, and private disclosure rules. Least privilege and external-effect controls are therefore reasonably documented, though these remain mostly claims in the supplied files. CLI examples specify targets and read-only/local-fork boundaries, but there is no general per-operation confirmation flow. Sensitive-data checks and local credential storage are described; dependency security is limited to requiring npm audit before release, with no audit result or lockfile evidence supplied. Cleanup is dry-run first and preserves database records, but no clear recovery mechanism is documented. The README, package metadata, and repository address support attribution, while publisher identity remains unknown.

Reliability8 / 14 · 2.9/5

The README, package scripts, and CI mostly agree on Node 24, build, test, and contract checks; the sandbox is documented to fail closed when no engine is ready. The supplied material gives limited detail on failure messages, retries, and recovery. Dependencies have a stated Node version and installation guidance, but no lockfile contents or dependency-availability evidence is provided.

Adaptability15 / 18 · 4.2/5

The documentation distinguishes blind audits, incident investigations, public-source audits, bounty work, targeted follow-up, and disclosure, and it explains the boundary between discovery, verification, and confirmation. Skill triggers are listed but remain broad. The project describes support for multiple code stacks, providers, daemons, sandbox backends, and custom images; Node and OCI/Apple runtime prerequisites are also documented.

Convention14 / 18 · 3.9/5

The README is organized around scenarios, modes, preparation paths, automation, quickstart, and sandbox setup, with many commands, linked usage guidance, and stated limitations. Installation and the AGPL-3.0-only license are clear. Package version 0.4.0 is given, but no changelog appears in the supplied material; a contribution entry point exists, but ownership or maintenance responsibility is not clear. Naming is mostly stable, though the package name flounders differs from the product name Flounder, so this is not full marks.

Effectiveness10 / 13 · 3.8/5

The stated outputs include findings with execution evidence, tracked status, and Markdown reports, supporting follow-up verification and disclosure. Combining preparation, audit, verification, and reporting offers clear additional value for security research. Local mock use and budget/sandbox configuration are mentioned, but full use still requires a model provider, runtime, and sometimes target-specific toolchains, so the cost-benefit case is not universal.

Verifiability5 / 8 · 3.1/5

The README's main security and workflow claims receive partial corroboration from SECURITY.md, package.json, and CI configuration, but static materials cannot establish runtime behavior and no execution results are available for this review. The documentation generally distinguishes features from safety boundaries and warns against calling source-only execution a deployed-target reproduction. Several capabilities remain maintainer assertions, so higher scores are not justified.

Risks and how to mitigate them
  • This is a low-confidence review of the supplied static files; code, tests, and dependency audits were not run.
  • Use only on authorized targets and follow SECURITY.md restrictions on live systems, network broadcasts, and private disclosure.
  • The host-execution escape hatch explicitly lacks kernel-level isolation; do not use it with untrusted dependencies or real model-generated exploit code.
Evidence confidence: Low Reviewed Oct 16, 2026 Reviewed revision 505571a80909
See the full review method →

FAQ

Do I need a provider account or API key to audit?
The model provider must be authenticated on the execution daemon. openai-codex uses pi subscription/OAuth; other models can be configured with provider OAuth or an API key as described in the model setup guide.
Will Flounder run PoCs directly in my host source directory?
No. Model-generated code, PoCs, dependency installs, and local tests run in a copied workspace. If the default sandbox is unavailable, it does not silently fall back to host execution.
Does a model-suspected bug automatically become a report?
No. Findings should be backed by local command execution evidence; the workflow can also run refutation, real-target confirmation, and report-readiness checks.
Can I audit targets beyond Solidity?
Yes. The repository says audit strategy comes from the model; Solidity/EVM and ZK are high-signal examples, not hard-coded limits. A target may need additional tooling or a custom sandbox image.
View on GitHub ↗ Install ↓

Compare agents like this one

The same FARS review applied across the shortlist this agent qualifies for.

Related agents