# Reporting Pentest Report

> Structure a professional penetration-test report (engagement deliverable, not a single bug). Load at the end of a pentest, on "write the pentest report", "executive summary", "deliverable", or compiling findings for a client. Signals: engagement wrap-up, multiple findings, client report.

- Skill: `noorqureshi/reporting-pentest-report` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add noorqureshi/reporting-pentest-report`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/noorqureshi/reporting-pentest-report/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Docs & Writing
- Author: NoorQureshi (https://skillmd.com/u/noorqureshi)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/noorqureshi/reporting-pentest-report

---


# Penetration-test report

## When it governs
End of a pentest engagement, when findings become a client deliverable. Different from a
bug-bounty report (`reporting-bug-bounty-writeup`): this is the whole engagement — executive
narrative plus detailed findings — read by both executives and engineers.

## Structure
1. **Executive summary** — non-technical: what was tested, overall risk posture, the 3–5 things
   that matter, and business impact. One page. No jargon.
2. **Scope & methodology** — assets/IPs/apps in scope, dates, testing type (black/grey/white),
   standards followed (PTES/OWASP WSTG/NIST), and limitations.
3. **Findings** — one per issue, ordered by risk. Each: title, severity (CVSS vector + rating),
   affected assets, description, **reproduction steps** (exact requests/commands), **evidence**
   (screenshots/output), **impact** (business terms), **remediation** (specific fix), references.
4. **Risk ratings** — a consistent method (CVSS + likelihood/impact matrix); explain it.
5. **Remediation roadmap** — prioritized, with quick wins vs strategic fixes; owners/timelines if known.
6. **Appendices** — full tool output, methodology detail, out-of-scope notes, retest results.

## Quality bar
- **Reproducible**: an engineer can follow each finding from a clean state.
- **Two audiences**: executives read the summary; engineers read the findings — serve both.
- **Actionable remediation**: name the specific fix (parameterize the query, enforce object-level
  authz), not "sanitize input" (see `defense-hardening-baseline`).
- **Evidence hygiene**: redact secrets/PII; store raw evidence securely; keep the client's data confidential.

## Gotchas
- Severity must reflect *demonstrated* impact in context, not the theoretical max.
- Don't bury the critical findings under low-severity noise — lead with what matters.
- Deliver the report over a secure channel; it's a map of how to break the client.

## References
PTES; OWASP WSTG; NIST SP 800-115; FIRST CVSS 3.1.