If you are an open-source maintainer, developer advocate, or builder, you know the cycle: you build an amazing tool, but writing the launch blog post, documentation, or tutorial takes hours. For the Hermes Agent Challenge , I wanted to build something that solves this exact problem. I built devto-blogger , a custom, prompt-driven skill for the brand new Hermes Agent by Nous Research. It autonomously scans any workspace or codebase, analyzes the architecture, and drafts a fully-structured, rich Markdown technical article ready for publication on DEV. 🚀 What is Hermes Agent? Hermes Agent is an open-source agentic system built by Nous Research (the lab behind the famous Hermes LLM models). Unlike basic coding copilots or simple chatbot wrappers, Hermes is: Environment-Aware : It runs sandboxed in Docker, Modal, Daytona, SSH, or locally. Connected : It interfaces with Telegram, Discord, Slack, WhatsApp, and more. Closed Learning Loop : It has persistent memory and creates custom skills on the fly from its own experience. 🔧 The Entry: The devto-blogger Skill In Hermes Agent, a "skill" is defined by a simple, declarative Markdown file ( SKILL.md ) located in the ~/.hermes/skills/ directory. By utilizing a prompt-driven skill structure, we can guide the agent's behavior globally without writing complex Python orchestration scripts. Here is the custom skill I designed and installed for this challenge: --- name : devto-blogger description : " Scan the codebase and generate a comprehensive Dev.to technical blog post draft." version : 1.0.0 author : Hermes Agent Developer license : MIT platforms : [ linux , macos , windows ] metadata : hermes : tags : [ devto , blogging , documentation , markdown , technical-writing ] related_skills : [ plan , design-md ] --- # Dev.to Technical Blogger Skill Use this skill when you need to write an in-depth technical post, review, or tutorial about the active workspace or codebase. ## Core Behavior 1. **Codebase Inspection** : Scan repository

In 2024, Orca Security sued Wiz and demanded their full git version control history. Orca wanted to see "when features and functions were added, modified, or altered, including through engineers' notes and comments." The court recognized git history as relevant evidence in a software IP dispute. It ordered production of commit logs tied to two specific features. That ruling should concern you. Your commits record author name, email, timestamp, and content hash. Git chains them together cryptographically, replicates them across clones, and makes them discoverable in litigation. You are building a legal record whether you intend to or not. You already use git as a development tool. It is also a chain of custody for intellectual property. And you are probably destroying yours. A Cryptographic Chain of Custody Every git commit stores five things: the content of the change, the author's name and email, the author's timestamp, the committer's name and email, and the committer's timestamp. That commit is hashed using SHA-1 (or SHA-256 in newer repositories), and the hash incorporates the hash of the parent commit. Change one byte anywhere in the chain and every subsequent hash changes. This is a Merkle DAG. The same data structure that makes blockchains tamper-evident. Your commit history is a cryptographic proof linking each change to all previous changes. Git records three layers of timestamps. AuthorDate is when the content was written. CommitterDate is when it was finalized into the repository. And the server-side push timestamp, recorded by GitHub or GitLab, marks when the remote received the data. That third timestamp is outside the developer's control. A clone is a full copy of the entire history. Your collaborators, CI runners, and backup systems each hold an independent replica. Forensics researchers call this "evidence proliferation." Tampering with one copy does nothing if fifty others exist unchanged. Under Federal Rules of Evidence 902(14), data verified throu

Let Your AI Agent Manage skill itself Most developer tools still assume the human is the operator. You read the documentation. You install the CLI. You decide where files should go. You copy commands from a README, paste them into a terminal, check the output, fix the path, and then explain the final state back to your AI coding agent. That made sense when tools were only built for humans. But AI coding agents now run commands, inspect files, follow project conventions, and repair broken local state. If a tool is meant to help agents, the better question is not: How does a human use this CLI? It is: Can the agent operate the CLI by itself? That is one of the quiet but important ideas behind aweskill : it is a CLI-first Skill package manager that AI agents can operate themselves. Website: aweskill.webioinfo.top It is already used as supporting infrastructure for several Webioinfo projects: awescholar — AI-agent-operable scientific literature discovery and curation. Search, annotate, filter, and report on academic papers. aweshelf — Session bookmark manager for Claude Code and Codex. Bookmark, categorize, and restore sessions with aweswitch profiles. Awesome AI Meets Biology — A curated survey of AI applications in biology, bioinformatics, and biomedical research, powered by awescholar. The Old Workflow: You Manage the Agent's Tools When a new AI Agent needs a Skill, the usual workflow looks like this: You find the Skill. You download or copy it. You locate the agent's Skill directory. You place SKILL.md in the right folder. You restart the agent. You hope the next agent uses the same layout. This is manageable once. It becomes messy when you use Codex, Claude Code, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Windsurf, Qwen Code, OpenCode, or any other coding agent side by side. Each one has its own directory layout and conventions. The human becomes the package manager. That is backward. If the agent is already capable of editing your repo, running tests, and diagnosing failures, it should

Anthropic's Mythos model can autonomously find zero-day vulnerabilities. Their CVD disclosure process uses manual SHA-3-512 hash commitments to prove findings existed. I built something that automates that in one line of Python. What AetherProof does One function call generates a 128-byte Ed25519-signed receipt that proves: What model ran — FNV-1a hash of provider/model ID What it produced — hash of the output When — cryptographic nanosecond timestamp Tamper-evident — flip any byte anywhere → INVALID python import aetherproof receipt = aetherproof.for_anthropic( "Find vulnerabilities in this binary.", finding_text, model="claude-mythos-preview" ) receipt.save("CVE-2026-001.receipt") print(receipt.verify()) # True Try it in 30 seconds pip install aetherproof python -c " import aetherproof r = aetherproof.for_anthropic('question', 'answer') print(r.verify()) # True print(r.pretty()) " The unusual part — invisible Unicode watermarking Receipts embed invisibly into any text using Unicode Private Use Area codepoints (U+E000–U+E0FF). AI output carries its own audit trail. Works in any language — Arabic, Chinese, Devanagari, Hebrew, Thai, Japanese all tested. signed_output = aetherproof.embed(ai_response, receipt.to_bytes()) # Text looks identical. Receipt is inside. aetherproof.verify_embedded(signed_output) # True Numbers 187 tests, 0 failures 128/128 byte flips all detected 1000/1000 tamper probes pass Cross-language: Python generates, Rust CLI verifies 15,446 receipts/sec (Python) · 5,472/sec (Rust) Why AGPL-3.0 Free for open source. Commercial use needs a license. This is the compliance layer under your AI stack — it should be open, auditable, and not vendor-locked. GitHub https://github.com/pulkit6732/aetherproof Built by Pulkit. Feedback welcome.

Meet Halimun Proxy a high-performance, ultra-low latency proxy tunnel system built from the ground up in Rust. Why Rust? By leveraging Rust , Halimun achieves extreme efficiency. Using the Axum web framework and Tokio for non-blocking asynchronous I/O, it manages to maintain a tiny footprint—running on as little as ~15MB of RAM . It’s designed to be fast, memory-safe, and incredibly stable under load. Core Security Features Halimun isn't just a proxy; it’s a security layer. It enforces strict request validation to ensure your internal services are never exposed to malicious actors: AES-256-CBC Encryption: End-to-end payload masking. Even if your traffic is intercepted, the actual API endpoint and data remain indecipherable. HMAC-SHA256 Integrity: Validates that data hasn't been tampered with in transit. Replay Attack Prevention: Uses Nonce and timestamp verification in-memory (via DashMap ) to reject duplicate spoofed requests. SSRF Protection: Built-in mechanisms to prevent attackers from targeting your internal network infrastructure (e.g., 127.0.0.1 ). Camouflage Routing: It hides your actual API structure behind random, dummy URL segments, making traffic profiling by WAFs or human analysts nearly impossible. Quick Start (Docker) Halimun is "Docker-ready," making it easy to drop into any existing infrastructure. 1. Configuration First, generate your encryption keys using the built-in generator: # Generate keys and save to .env docker build -t halimun-proxy . docker run --rm halimun-proxy ./halimun-proxy --keygen --format = env > .env 2. Deployment Configure your config.yaml to map your backend services, then launch your cluster: docker-compose up -d Your production proxy is now live, listening securely on port 80 while your backend services remain completely secluded within a private Docker network. Under the Hood: Request Lifecycle Halimun uses an encrypted tunnel approach. A typical request follows this structure: POST /proxy/1/SEGMENT1/SEGMENT2/SEGMENT3/SEGMEN

Claude-ITect-Skill Update: Regenerating Your Claude Code Setup (Club Optional) "People assume that configuration is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly... skilly-willy... stuff." — a Time Lord, probably, if Time Lords shipped install scripts There is a particular flavor of pain known only to people who run Claude Code seriously: the slow, soul-eroding ritual of configuring fifty-one little things by hand. You wire one hook. You forget the second. You discover the third only exists in a Discord message from four months ago. Somewhere, a yak grows another inch of fur specifically so you can shave it. Claude-ITect-Skill exists to make that ritual unnecessary. It is a one-command starter pack that drops a curated arsenal of skills, agents, and session hooks into any project's .claude/ directory, and then, with the smug confidence of someone who has clearly been burned before, tells you to run /audit to make sure it actually worked. The author calls people like himself "Claude-ITects™," which the industry refuses to call us, and honestly, after using this, the industry should reconsider. This is the update, the regeneration , if you will. Same face-of-the-project, new internals. Let's open the TARDIS doors and see how much bigger it is on the inside. The pitch, in one breath Install it. It deposits a .claude/ folder containing 54 skills, 4 agent definitions, and 6 hook files into your project, patches your settings.json to wire up the session hooks, and gets out of your way. The README's entire onboarding flow is two words long: run audit . That restraint is the first sign you're dealing with someone who has actually used the thing he built rather than someone who just wanted a README with a lot of headers. The install story is genuinely good. PowerShell for Windows, bash for macOS/Linux, sensible --force and --skip-hooks flags, and a thoughtful -ProjectPath option

This is a submission for the GitHub Finish-Up-A-Thon Challenge What I Built I built the Atomberg Goal Setting & Tracking Portal — a full-featured, role-based HR performance management system for Atomberg Technologies (a fast-growing Indian consumer electronics brand). The portal manages the complete employee performance lifecycle : 🎯 Goal Setting — Employees create goals with weightage, UoM type, and thrust area alignment. Business rules enforced: max 8 goals, total 100% weightage, minimum 10% per goal ✅ Manager Approval Workflow — Submit → Review → Approve / Return for Rework 📊 Quarterly Check-ins — Q1–Q4 progress logging with 4 UoM types (Numeric Min/Max, Timeline, Zero-is-best) 🚨 Escalation Monitor — Rule-based detection of overdue submissions, missing approvals, and pending manager reviews 📈 Analytics & Reports — QoQ trend charts, department-wise performance, thrust area distribution, CSV exports 🔒 Admin Governance — Cycle phase management, shared goal distribution, full audit logging Tech Stack: React 18 + Vite · Context API · localStorage (zero-backend demo) · Recharts · Lucide Icons · Custom dark glassmorphism CSS Demo 🔗 Live App: https://atomberg-goal-tracker.vercel.app/ 📁 GitHub Repo: https://github.com/anonomous29/atomberg-goal-tracker Quick Login Credentials Role Email Password Admin priya.sharma@atomberg.com admin123 Manager rajesh.kumar@atomberg.com manager123 Employee vikram.singh@atomberg.com emp123 What to try: Login as Admin → Go to Escalation Monitor → see rule-based alerts Go to Reports → QoQ Trends tab → see Q1 performance bar chart Login as Employee → Dashboard shows Q1 score donut + goal-level progress Login as Manager → See team check-in status and review Q1 feedback The Comeback Story This project started as a hackathon requirement — a Business Requirements Document (BRD) from Atomberg asking for a digital goal management system. The initial version had the core structure but was essentially an empty shell: blank dashboards on login, no check

"This wasn't a success story. It started as survival." Intro Hey, I'm Supreeth C , a third-year engineering student, open source developer, and professional overthinker from Bengaluru. This is my first blog, and fair warning: it's long. Not "LinkedIn post with 5 bullet points" long. Actually long. This is the story of how I got selected for Google Summer of Code 2026 with CircuitVerse but more honestly, it's the story of how I almost didn't submit a proposal, almost quit twice, and spent a lot amount of time reading codebases on the Bengaluru Metro while missing my stop. Connect with me on GitHub and LinkedIn PS: I'm writing this at 4.05am, because sleep is a myth XD. Act I: The Prequel Second semester. Fresh-faced. Absolutely clueless. I joined Pointblank , the one genuinely breathable space in my Tier-3 college. I can say its the best student-run club overall and the main reason being : everyone around me was terrifyingly good . Codeforces experts and specialists, GSoC mentees, LFX mentees, Smart India Hackathon winners. People whose LinkedIn bios are of several lines. And me? I knew C++. That was it. That was my entire personality. Cue the imposter syndrome : that lovely feeling where you're convinced you snuck into a room you have no business being in, and everyone else is one conversation away from figuring it out. My solution? Chaos. I started learning everything simultaneously: web dev, Android, ML, DevOps, a bit of systems engineering. Jack of all trades, master of none, spiraling fast. I wasn't learning; I was collecting domains like Pokémon and actually using none of them. Then a senior said something that cut clean through the noise: "Find your own path." So I slowed down. Started from the basics of web dev. Attended many hackathons but always ended up in third or fourth and winning: zero . But something clicked anyway. Those hackathons introduced me to open source, and somewhere in that chaos, I gave myself a simple challenge: 4 pull requests for Hacktob

I've been on OpenRouter for a side project for a few months and it's solid for prototyping, but the streaming latency and the pricing markup on models I could call directly started bugging me enough to look around. Curious what other people running real production traffic have settled on. submitted by /u/Quantum_Nest [link] [留言]

Or any other type of activity other than sitting in front of a computer like sitting in a park, running on a treadmill, etc? I’m curious how much more freedom from deskmaxxing people are getting today from using what’s available with build automation tools and harnesses on Claude Code, Code , Antimatter, etc. like GSD, Superpowers, Smith, Cowork, etc. submitted by /u/dennisplucinik [link] [留言]

Originally published at https://rnye.tech Hi all, today's post details an interesting problem that faced a website thanks to undocumented Google crawl behaviour that hit us suddenly. The website used Azure Front Door for global CDN/WAF capability but only had one origin - hosted in Azure in the UK South region. This should have been fine given it's a UK-centric site that receives very little global traffic - that is until Google starts crawling you from the West Coast of the US suddenly. Let's dive in. The problem: what Google Search Console was telling us All was well with the site from the UK, cache hit ratios were in the 80%+ range, response times were generally rapid even if cache was missed. Google typically crawled the site thousands of times a day. Then suddenly a ticket came in detailing a drastic drop-off in mid-April. Average response times were never great according to Google (700ms) but they'd suddenly jumped to almost double that number (1.3s) with seemingly no explanation. There was absolutely no denying the correlation between crawl requests and average response time, and indeed this is documented behaviour - if response times increase, Google backs off. They claim it's to prevent overloading the site, and I believe that, but I also feel it's likely to ensure they're not wasting their crawl compute resources on long-loading pages. Either way, Google Search Console offered zero explanation as to why. So the team did what most dev/devops teams do - review latest changes, any Azure Front Door configuration changes in particular, as well as wider site changes. And nothing correlated. AFD hadn't been changed for two weeks, it was that stable, and other changes weren't remotely related. Besides, genuine traffic in the UK wasn't seeing the impact. Response times were still good in the P50/P90/P99 metrics. Tracing the cause with Azure Front Door logs and AI As I've touched on in my last post , AI can be fantastic at quick data analysis. That's not to say a hu

What Happened Last month, the UK Government's AI Safety Institute merged AgentThreatBench into their official inspect_evals framework — the same framework they use to evaluate frontier AI models from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google DeepMind. AgentThreatBench is an open-source adversarial benchmark I built that contains 200+ attack payloads specifically designed to test whether AI agents can resist memory poisoning attacks. Why This Matters AI agents are increasingly being deployed with persistent memory — they remember past conversations, user preferences, and context across sessions. This creates a new attack surface: memory poisoning . An attacker who can inject malicious content into an agent's memory can: Exfiltrate sensitive data on subsequent sessions Override safety instructions persistently Manipulate agent behavior without the user's knowledge The OWASP Agentic Security Initiative identified this as ASI06 — Agent Memory Poisoning . What AgentThreatBench Tests The benchmark covers 5 attack categories: Category Payloads Description Prompt Injection 40+ Instructions disguised as memory content Protected Key Tampering 40+ Attempts to overwrite system-level keys Sensitive Data Leakage 40+ PII/credential exfiltration via memory Size Anomaly 40+ Memory inflation / resource exhaustion Behavioral Drift 40+ Gradual personality/instruction shifts How to Use It pip install agentthreatbench # Run the full benchmark against your agent atb run --target your_agent_endpoint --output results.json # Or use individual attack categories atb run --category prompt_injection --target your_agent_endpoint The BEIS Validation The UK Government's AI Safety Institute uses inspect_evals to: Evaluate frontier models before deployment decisions Benchmark safety mitigations across providers Track regression in safety properties over time Having AgentThreatBench merged into this framework means it's now part of the official government toolkit for AI safety evaluation. Links GitHub : github.co

ShareBox is my self-hosted streaming server: a PHP thing I built because I just wanted to send someone a link to a movie without installing Plex and its ten gigabytes of dependencies. It runs on my seedbox, serves my users, and one morning I notice it's starting to pick up a few stars on GitHub. And then, that little voice: "does this thing actually hold up?" Because between "works on my machine" and "code that strangers are going to install on their own box," there's a chasm. A chasm full of flaws I can't see anymore, because I've had my nose in it for weeks. Normally, you re-read your code. Except re-reading 22,000 lines alone, honestly, you do it badly: you skim over what you think you already know. So I tried something else — unleashing a pack of 26 AI agents on it, each with a precise mission, and seeing what surfaced. Spoiler: they found a flaw that had been sitting right under my eyes from the start. 26 agents to comb through my own code The idea wasn't "AI, tell me if my code is good" — that always produces the same encouraging, useless mush. The idea was to orchestrate : split the audit into roles, run the agents in parallel, then have a final, deliberately harsh agent tear apart the conclusions. The pipeline looked like this: eleven readers start in parallel, each swallowing an entire slice of the code (the core, the streaming handlers, the API, the front end, the tests, the Docker setup…). Their reports flow up into an architecture synthesis and a test-coverage analysis. Then twelve "radar" agents each score one single axis — security, performance, architecture, tests… And finally, a "verdict" agent re-reads every score in adversarial mode: its job is to knock down the ones that are too kind. Audit pipeline: 11 readers in parallel, then synthesis, then 12 radar agents, then an adversarial verdict. 11 readers in parallel each slice of the code read in full Architecture + coverage synthesis connect the pieces, measure the gaps 12 radar agents one agent = on

Ex‑DeepMind researchers unveiled AI lab Inherent, emerging from stealth with a significant funding round reported at about $50 million (also reported as £40m). The startup plans to pursue AI science research and build lab capabilities to accelerate foundational work and commercialization. submitted by /u/Objective_Farm_1886 [link] [留言]