> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://community.rifteo.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
# Economist Attack ★
> Weighs each attack path's effort against its likely impact, pursuing the highest-value surfaces first to find the most important weakness with the least wasted effort it shapes the order you test in, not what you test. Trigger when doing any offensive security engagement and deciding where to focus effort, when the attack surface is large and not everything can be tested with equal depth, or when the goal is maximum impact from available time and effort. Works standalone or alongside a mindset skill like redmind.
**Status:** Stable
**Version:** 1.0.0
**Author:** Rifteo
**Tags:** red-team, pentest, offensive-security, strategy, prioritization
**Installation**
```bash theme={"system"}
rifteo-skills add economist-attack
```
***
## Summary
Apply an effort-impact ratio to every offensive engagement — always test the highest-yield surface first, never waste budget on paths that show no signal.
* Uses a four-quadrant Effort-Impact Framework to orient prioritization: low effort / high impact always goes first
* Identifies high-value surface indicators: custom business logic, auth boundaries, data ingestion points, privileged functionality, recently added features
* Issues communication checkpoints when a finding is reached or a surface goes dry — lets the user steer allocation
* Works standalone or alongside a mindset skill like redmind
***
## SKILL.md file
### Economist Attack — Offensive Strategy Mindset
#### The Economic Lens
* Every action has a cost — time, effort, noise — and an expected return — impact potential
* The ratio between return and cost is what drives prioritization
* The goal is not to test everything — it is to find the most impactful weakness with the least wasted effort
* This does not mean avoiding hard or deep work — it means never investing effort in a path that shows no sign of yielding anything
The question driving every decision: *what is the smallest effort that could reveal the most important weakness right now?*
#### The Effort-Impact Framework
These quadrants are a thinking tool, not a rule. Use judgment — the framework orients, it does not decide.
| Quadrant | Orientation |
| ------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- |
| Low effort / High impact | Always first — no reason to delay |
| Low effort / Low impact | Quick check — don't dwell, move on |
| High effort / High impact | Invest when real signal is present |
| High effort / Low impact | Deprioritize — return only if no other paths remain |
The framework does not limit what you test. It shapes the order in which you test it.
#### High-Value Surface Indicators
These are signals that a surface is worth deeper investment:
* Custom business logic — anything built in-house rather than relying on a standard library or framework
* Authentication and authorization boundaries — where identity is established and access is enforced
* Data ingestion points — anywhere external or user-controlled data enters the system
* Integration points with external systems, third-party APIs, or services
* Recently added or modified features — new code is where errors concentrate
* Privileged or administrative functionality — higher impact when broken
* Anything handling payments, identity, or sensitive data flows
* Complexity — the more moving parts, the more room for assumptions to break
When you encounter these signals, weight the surface higher in your allocation.
#### The Ratio Principle
* When two paths have similar impact potential, take the cheaper one first
* When a path is expensive but shows real behavioral signal, the investment is still justified — a high return makes a high cost worthwhile
* Always be asking: is there a path with a better result/effort ratio than the one I am currently on?
* If yes, and the current path has no signal — switch
* If yes, but the current path is actively yielding — finish the thread before switching
The ratio is not about finding the easiest path. It is about never spending effort where there is no evidence of return.
#### What to Deprioritize
* Best-practice findings — missing security headers, weak cookie flags, cipher suite issues — are valid but not the focus of this mindset
* Do not actively hunt best-practice gaps while high-value surfaces remain untested
* These get documented when encountered naturally and become worth pursuing when they chain to something that gives them real impact
* If a surface has been approached from multiple angles with no behavioral signal, it is not yielding — the budget spent here has diminishing returns
Deprioritizing is not the same as ignoring. It means the allocation goes elsewhere first.
#### Communication Checkpoints
This skill does not decide alone what "enough" looks like — that is a decision made with the user.
**When a finding is reached:**
* Surface it to the user with its impact assessment
* Ask whether this level of impact meets the engagement goal or whether to continue deeper
* Do not assume the engagement is over — and do not assume it should continue
**When a surface goes dry:**
* If a surface has been tested without findings, communicate it
* Ask the user whether to invest more depth here or redirect effort to a higher-signal surface
* Present the options — let the user steer the allocation
The economist knows the cost and the potential return. The user decides how much to spend.
#### Domain Calibration
What counts as high-value is not universal — it shifts with the target type. The indicators for a web application are not the same as for an Active Directory environment, a cloud infrastructure, or a binary. Before allocating effort, calibrate the high-value surface indicators to the engagement context.
Apply the economic lens after understanding what the target type makes expensive and what it makes cheap to break.
***
## Benchmark Results
Tested on claude-sonnet-4-6 via Claude Code CLI. Same prompt, same model, same target. The only variable is whether the skill is loaded.
| Metric | Without Skill | With Skill |
| ------------------------------------------- | ------------- | ---------- |
| First move: high-value surface | No | Yes |
| Low-value surfaces deprioritized | No | Yes |
| Best-practice checks pursued first | Yes | No |
| Communication checkpoint issued | No | Yes |
| High-value surfaces covered (first 3 moves) | 1 / 3 | 3 / 3 |
| Effort wasted on filtered/unreachable ports | Yes | No |
***
## Related skills
Red team mindset that shifts the agent to offensive security thinking
Re-examine every conclusion from multiple angles before delivery
Map the full attack surface of a target before testing begins