openclaw/apk-reverse
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Restructure SKILL.md as a gated procedure, not advice

Browse Source 
Why
  The reference material was good and mostly went unread in practice. The failure mode was
  not ignorance - it was reading the file, agreeing with it, and then reasoning from first
  principles anyway, because everything in it was phrased as guidance. Guidance can be
  acknowledged and set aside; a gate cannot be cleared without doing the thing.

SKILL.md is now a procedure
  New top matter, in the order a reader meets it:
  - "How to use this file" states plainly that this is a procedure with gates, that this
    file wins over intuition until evidence overrides it, and why (every rule is residue
    of a failure that cost hours).
  - Four override rules R1-R4, each with a one-line claim, the concrete trap, and a
    pointer. R1 deliverable-as-a-testable-sentence, R2 one variable plus a control build,
    R3 never ship or claim an unverified artifact, R4 identify the owning layer and
    re-classify when reality disagrees.
  - The symptom index is retitled "a matching row is a stop signal" and now carries an
    explicit instruction: load the file before your next command, not after your next
    three attempts.
  - Four gates G1-G4, each an action with a pass criterion and a fail description:
    deliverable form, environment truth (doctor.py + preflight), code location (including
    the virtualization check even when recon says "no packer"), and baseline/control with
    recorded time-to-death.
  - The workflow gains a skip-condition line per step ("it seems unnecessary" is not a
    condition) and a two-strike rule: two failures of the same shape mean the model is
    wrong, not the parameters, so re-classify instead of running a third variant.
  - New "What done means": six items, all required, with an explicit rule that a clean log
    is not evidence and that anything short of six is a checkpoint to be labelled as one.
  - New "Stop conditions": the six moments where pushing forward is the wrong move -
    repeated same-shape failure, a no-effect patch about to be retried, an unexplained
    failure, an unproven "blocked" verdict, a success claimed from absence of errors, and
    a measurement that disagrees with a settled conclusion.

README
  Documents the gated design and why it exists, and tells an agent reading it what to act
  on rather than read: the four rules, the symptom index as a stop signal, the gates, the
  two-strike rule, and the definition of done. Points at scripts/doctor.py as the cheapest
  first command.

Not changed
  Three section references (`ad-removal.md` server-driven, `recon.md` code-location,
  `dex-patching.md` finding-the-call-site) do not match a `##` heading textually. Each
  target does exist - two are bolded inline subheadings and one is "## Finding the call
  site" - so they resolve for a reader. Left alone deliberately: rewriting them would add
  churn without changing behaviour.
This commit is contained in:
inliver233
2026-09-20 01:00:11 +08:00
parent 6f565be57f
commit d1349b3cfa
2 changed files with 158 additions and 13 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
README.md
+35 -1
View File
@@ -9,6 +9,34 @@ organized for progressive disclosure — a short decision-oriented `SKILL.md`, d
references loaded only when a step needs them, and parameterized scripts you can run
directly.
## How an agent is expected to consume this
`SKILL.md` is deliberately written as a **procedure with gates** rather than as advice, because the
observed failure mode is not ignorance — it is a model reading the whole thing, agreeing with it, and
then reasoning from first principles anyway.
So there are four things in the body that are meant to be *acted on*, not read:
- **Four override rules (R1–R4).** Where they conflict with the current plan, they win until evidence
overrides them.
- **A symptom index.** Each row is a failure that has already been paid for. **A matching row is a
stop signal**: load that file before running another command, rather than after a few more attempts.
Reasoning past a known symptom is how the same hours get spent twice.
- **Four gates (G1–G4),** each an action with a pass criterion. "I understand the idea" does not clear
a gate. They exist so that classification, environment truth and a control build happen *before*
the first patch, not after the third failure.
- **A two-strike rule and stop conditions.** Two failures of the same shape mean the model is wrong,
not the parameters. The third variant of a hypothesis that already failed twice is where rounds go
to die.
And one thing at the end that is meant to be *withheld*: **"done"** has a definition (six items). A
clean log is not one of them. Anything short of all six is a checkpoint, and should be reported as a
checkpoint with what remains.
If you are an agent reading this: the cheapest possible first command is
`python scripts/doctor.py`. It tells you which of these tools exist here, which scripts can actually
run, and whether something in the environment is already poisoning your measurements.
## What it is good at
- Deciding **fast** whether a request is even achievable client-side, instead of
@@ -49,7 +77,13 @@ directly.
## Structure
```
SKILL.md decision tree, workflow, hard constraints, indexes
SKILL.md a procedure with gates, not background reading:
how-to-use -> four override rules (R1-R4)
symptom index (a matching row is a stop signal)
four gates (G1-G4, actions with pass criteria)
thirteen classification questions
the workflow, with a per-step skip condition and a two-strike rule
what "done" means -> stop conditions -> constraints -> indexes
references/ loaded on demand, one topic each
recon.md identify packer, SDKs, code location, tamper checks; unpacking
packers.md hardened targets: rejection signals, measuring the validation
SKILL.md
+123 -12
View File
@@ -1,30 +1,68 @@
---
name: apk-reverse
description: Reverse engineer, debloat, de-ad, patch, or re-sign Android APKs, and analyze their runtime and server-side behavior. Use when a task involves an .apk/.aab/.dex/.so sample, smali or dex patching, Frida/objection runtime hooking, repacking and re-signing, removing ads or SDK trackers, probing a mobile app's HTTP API, or deciding whether a client-side patch is even capable of achieving the goal. Covers recon, anti-tamper, ad removal, membership/paywall limits, dex-level surgical patching, repack pitfalls, device and emulator setup, and a hard-won failure catalogue.
description: Reverse engineer, debloat, de-ad, patch, or re-sign Android APKs, and analyze their runtime and server-side behavior. Use when a task involves an .apk/.aab/.dex/.so sample, smali or dex patching, Frida/objection runtime hooking, repacking and re-signing, removing ads or SDK trackers, probing a mobile app's HTTP API, or deciding whether a client-side patch is even capable of achieving the goal. Covers recon, anti-tamper, ad removal, membership/paywall limits, dex-level surgical patching, repack pitfalls, device and emulator setup, and a hard-won failure catalogue. Load the body before planning any patch work: it opens with a symptom index and four gates that must be cleared first.
---
# APK Reverse Engineering & Patching
Goal of this skill: get to a **verified, installable, still-working artifact** fast, and avoid the whole class of mistakes that silently destroy an APK.
Goal: reach a **verified, installable, still-working artifact** fast — and avoid the whole class of
mistakes that destroy an APK while looking completely healthy.
Three rules override everything else in this skill:
## How to use this file
1. **Deliver it in the environment the request actually requires.** "It works" is not the goal; "it works under the stated constraint" is. A result obtained with root, or with live instrumentation, or with a host proxy, frequently does **not** satisfy a request for an installable artifact that works on a normal device — and it is easy to present that result as a finished one. Write the constraint down as a testable sentence in the first minutes and re-read it at every checkpoint. If you cannot meet it, say so and label any privileged workaround as a fallback, never as the deliverable. Full treatment: `references/long-task-discipline.md` §the most expensive drift.
2. **Never ship an unverified APK.** "It assembles" is not "it works". Install it, launch it, exercise the feature you changed, on a real device or a close emulator.
3. **Know which layer owns the behavior before you patch.** Ads, paywalls, and feature gates live in different places. Patching the wrong layer either does nothing or breaks the app. Classify first (see step 2 below), patch second.
This file is a **procedure with gates**, not background reading. Three things are mandatory:
## Symptom index — look here before you debug from first principles
- Before you patch anything, clear the **four gates** in §Gates. They are actions with pass criteria,
not attitudes.
- When anything fails in a way your current plan does not explain, **stop and check the symptom
index**. If a row matches, load that file before running another command.
- When this file and your own reasoning disagree, **this file wins** until you have evidence that
overrides it. Every rule here is the residue of a failure that cost hours; your current intuition is
the intuition of someone who has not hit it yet.
You arrived at a symptom, not at a file name. This table maps what you are *seeing* to the file that
has already paid for that lesson. Skim it whenever something fails in a way the current plan does not
explain; the cost of one lookup is minutes, and every entry below cost someone hours.
## Four rules that override everything else
**R1 — Write the deliverable as a testable sentence before you touch the target.**
"It works" is not the goal; "it works under the stated constraint" is. Root-assisted, live-
instrumentation, host-proxy and patched-device results frequently do **not** satisfy a request for an
installable artifact that works on a normal phone — and it is easy to present such a result as
finished. Write the sentence, re-read it at every checkpoint, and if you cannot meet it, say so
plainly and label the privileged workaround a **fallback**, never the deliverable.
→ `references/long-task-discipline.md` §the most expensive drift
**R2 — Change one variable at a time, and keep a control build.**
An experiment that flips two things teaches nothing when it fails, and a failure you cannot attribute
will be attributed to the wrong cause. Every "the app rejects X" claim needs its own run, and every
patch needs a same-pipeline control that still fails the old way.
→ `references/long-task-discipline.md` §single-variable discipline
**R3 — Never ship or claim an unverified artifact.**
"It assembles" is not "it works"; "the process started" is not "the feature works"; "no error in the
log" is not "the check is gone". Install it, launch it, exercise the exact feature you changed, and
look at the screen. Prove the device is running the build you made — hash it, do not trust the
filename.
→ `references/verification.md`
**R4 — Identify the owning layer before patching, and re-classify when reality disagrees.**
Ads, paywalls, feature gates, integrity checks and update gates live in different layers (Java, dex,
native, Dart/Unity, server). Patching the wrong layer either does nothing or breaks the app. If a
patch "had no effect", the diagnosis was wrong — go back to classification instead of patching harder.
→ `references/recon.md`, then the layer-specific file the symptom index points at
## Symptom index — a matching row is a stop signal
You arrive at a symptom, not at a file name. Each row below is a failure that has already been paid
for. **If any row matches what you are observing, load the file before your next command** — not after
your next three attempts. Reasoning from first principles at this point is how the same hours get
spent twice; more than one entry here is a lesson that was re-derived by hand while the answer sat
unread in this repository.
| What you observe | Load first |
|---|---|
| A repackaged/re-signed build **dies before your code runs**; `SIGSEGV`, all registers zero, `pc=0`, `fault addr` near `0x0` | `native-tamper-and-suicide.md` (deliberate crash), then `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` |
| **No packer** (Application is the app's own, dex readable) **and it still dies** | `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` |
| Log says a **Java-layer** signature/integrity check **passed**, yet the process dies | `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` §a Java-layer signature killer is a decoy |
| Deleting a library fixes validation but yields `UnsatisfiedLinkError: dlopen failed: library "X" not found` | `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` §the deadlock |
| Log says a **Java-layer** signature/integrity check **passed**, yet the process dies | `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` §a Java-layer "signature killer" is a decoy |
| Deleting a library fixes validation but yields `UnsatisfiedLinkError: dlopen failed: library "X" not found` | `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` §the deadlock that eats hours |
| Whole classes appear as bare `native` declarations with no body | `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` |
| A library's **SONAME does not match its filename** | `code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md`, `native-and-so.md` |
| Your edit had **no effect at all**, with no error | `packers.md` §map the validation boundary |
@@ -42,6 +80,34 @@ explain; the cost of one lookup is minutes, and every entry below cost someone h
| You are about to discard a route as "blocked" | `packers.md` — re-read it before writing any route off; mis-attributed failures have removed viable routes for hours |
| The task has run long and you are unsure what is already proven | `long-task-discipline.md` §keep a live record |
## Gates — clear these before you patch, in order
Each gate is an **action with a pass criterion**. Do not proceed past a gate you have not cleared, and
do not treat "I understand the idea" as clearing it. Skipping a gate is not a shortcut; it is how the
work gets redone.
**G1 · Deliverable form.** State, in one sentence you could hand to someone else, what artifact must
exist at the end and under what constraints (rooted or not, installable on a stock device or not, must
survive updates or not, online or offline). *Pass:* the sentence names a testable constraint, not an
activity. *Fail:* you are solving a problem in an environment the deliverable will never see.
**G2 · Environment truth.** Run `scripts/doctor.py` (and `scripts/preflight.py` if a device is in
play). *Pass:* you know which toolchains and scripts can actually run here, and you have seen the
environment warnings — clock skew, leftover `adb forward`/proxy, a device-side frida process already
running, a tool installed off-PATH. *Fail:* you are about to attribute to the target a failure caused
by your own setup.
**G3 · Code location.** From the manifest and dex, answer: is there a packer, where does the app's own
code live (dex / native / Dart / Unity / server), and is any of it virtualized to native. *Pass:* you
can name the class that owns the behaviour you intend to change, or you have an explicit plan to find
it. *Fail:* you are about to patch a layer you have not located. If recon says "no packer", still
check the virtualization shape — see the index rows above.
**G4 · Baseline and control.** *Pass:* you have a control run — the unmodified original, or a
zero-change repack through the same pipeline — and you have recorded the observed failure (including
**time-to-death**, if it dies). *Fail:* when the patched build misbehaves you will have nothing to
compare against, and every later measurement is unfalsifiable.
## Start here: classify the target in thirteen questions
@@ -110,9 +176,19 @@ Answer these before touching a tool. Every one of them changes the whole plan.
## The workflow, end to end
Steps are ordered. **Skip a step only when its stated skip condition is met** — "it seems
unnecessary" is not a condition, and it is the reason most of the failures in `pitfalls.md` happened.
**Two-strike rule.** If the *same kind* of attempt fails twice, stop and go back to classification.
Do not run a third variation of a hypothesis that has already failed twice. Two failures of one shape
means the model is wrong, not that the parameters need tuning — and the third attempt is where an
entire round gets spent confirming what the first two already said. Re-read the symptom index at that
point; it exists for exactly this moment.
1. **Preflight, then Recon** — `scripts/doctor.py` is the cheapest possible first command: it reports which toolchains and scripts can actually run here, and surfaces the environment facts that poison experiments (clock skew, leftover `adb forward`/proxy, a device-side frida process already running, a tool installed off-PATH). Then `scripts/preflight.py` before anything else if a device is involved (it takes seconds and prevents a whole class of false conclusions), then `references/recon.md`. Manifest, package name, version, ABI, dex count, packer, embedded SDKs, where the app's own code lives. Ten minutes here saves hours. **If it is packed, unpack before anything else** (`references/recon.md` §unpacking): you cannot patch code you cannot read, the encrypted payload lengths tell you which dumped dex is the original, and a memory dump must be de-duplicated by hash and structurally validated before any of it is trusted.
**If recon says there is no packer but a re-signed build still dies**, you are in the layer `references/code-virtualization-and-custom-linkers.md` covers — do not proceed on the assumption that "no packer" means "editable".
**If the app already dies on its own** — especially at a roughly constant time after launch, or with a native crash — locate the mechanism *before* planning any patch (`references/native-tamper-and-suicide.md`, `scripts/native_crash.py`). Record the observed time-to-death: it is the baseline every later attempt is measured against, and without it a surviving run cannot be told from a changed schedule.
*Skip condition:* never skipped. G2/G3 in §Gates are cleared here or not at all.
2. **Extract strings and endpoints** — build a picture of the app's API surface and SDK inventory from the dex string tables. No decompiler needed for this, and it is fast. Scripts: `scripts/dex_strings.py`.
3. **Trace to the owning class** — find the class that wraps the behavior (the app almost always wraps third-party SDKs in one helper). Reverse-lookup instructions: `references/dex-patching.md` §finding-the-call-site.
4. **Decide the patch layer** — client SDK call / client rendering / client data consumption / server contract. See the table in `references/ad-removal.md`.
@@ -123,6 +199,41 @@ Answer these before touching a tool. Every one of them changes the whole plan.
7. **Verify on device** — `references/environment.md` + `references/verification.md`. Check: launches, the changed behavior actually changed, nothing unrelated broke, and **the app reaches its normal UI with no blocking dialog**. First prove the artifact actually changed on the device -- a package manager reporting success does not prove an interposed confirmation was accepted (P18). Capture continuously for the first ~20 seconds after launch, **and look at the captures** — sampling gaps are how a blocking modal goes unseen (P20), and a burst of images that were never inspected is not evidence. If the accessibility tree is empty, the image is the primary evidence rather than a fallback.
8. **Log what you learned** — if a failure cost you more than thirty minutes, add it to `references/pitfalls.md`. That file is the most valuable artifact in this skill.
## What "done" means — do not claim it earlier
Every item below must be true before you report completion. Anything less is a **checkpoint** and must
be labelled as one, out loud, with what remains. Premature "done" is the most damaging thing you can
report, because it ends the investigation while the user believes the problem is solved.
1. **The artifact exists and its identity is recorded** — path plus hash, not a filename.
2. **It was installed and launched on the environment the deliverable sentence names** (G1/R1). If
that environment was not available to you, say so and label the result accordingly.
3. **The behaviour you changed is verified changed** — by direct observation of the feature, not by
the absence of an error message. "The log is clean" is not evidence; "the screen shows X" is.
4. **The features it touches still work.** You exercised them. A build that starts but whose affected
feature is dead is not a result.
5. **The original limitation is stated if any survives** — with the coupling that causes it, so the
next person can decide whether to accept it.
6. **Nothing you did leaves the target or the device in a broken state** unless that was the goal, and
any privileged workaround is labelled a fallback rather than the deliverable.
If items 1–4 hold but the environment was wrong, you have a **prototype**, not a deliverable. Say
"prototype" and name the gap.
## Stop conditions — halt and re-classify, do not retry
These are moments where continuing to push forward is the wrong move. Each has cost hours somewhere.
- **The same shape of attempt failed twice.** See the two-strike rule above.
- **A patch had no effect and you were about to try a third variant of it.** No effect means the
diagnosis was wrong, not that the patch was unlucky. Re-classify the layer.
- **A new failure has no place in your current model.** That is the symptom index's trigger condition.
- **You are about to write off a route as "blocked"** without a control build proving the block is
the app's doing rather than your pipeline's. Mis-attributed blocks have removed viable routes.
- **You are about to claim success on absence of errors.** See §What "done" means.
- **A measurement disagrees with a conclusion you already recorded as settled.** Re-open the
conclusion; do not explain the measurement away.
## Non-negotiable constraints
- **Read-only inputs.** Keep the original APK/dex untouched; work on copies. Always keep a known-good baseline to diff against.