HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
matheusmoreira
.files
Shell2022–2026
matheusmoreira / .files

.files

No place like ~

2Distinct people
13Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
18GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

No place like ~

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year13 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2022-11-18 02:36:16 UTC to 2026-07-01 01:36:16 UTC.

02462022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20222023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments20242025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 0 submissions, 6 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC606

What Hacker News says

13 sources
> I had no idea the system prompt was embedding things like "avoid abstractions; three similar lines of code are better than one helper." You ain't seen nothing yet. It used to say "Try the simplest approach first. Do not overdo it. Be extra concise." https://gist.github.com/roman01la/483d1db15043018096ac3babf5... Let's just say the words "simplest fix" trigger me to this day. > I know it won’t directly modify the system prompt I directly modify the system prompts in the Claude Code executable. I don't want the models to see contradictory instructions. I asked Claude himself to port the above patcher script to Python. https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/%7E/.lo... Every once in a while I ask Claude to download and dissect the latest Claude Code executable to see if Anthropic screwed up the prompts again. If I see anything
Read the rest
bad I add it to the script. Only then do I update Claude Code. It was during one of these script maintenance sessions that I noticed the server side prompt injection mechanism. I'll also tell Claude to look for and disable this steganography nonsense from now on as well. I usually audit the environment variables too. > it seems like CLAUDE.md should have the final say I wouldn't count on it.
In Claude Code is steganographically marking requests
Yeah I know about tweakcc, even had some custom prompts committed to my dotfiles repository for a while. For some reason it wasn't working for me, don't remember why. At first I used this shell script here: https://gist.github.com/roman01la/483d1db15043018096ac3babf5... Someone posted it on HN on the Opus degradation thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47660925 I just kept using it to fix the prompts for a long time. Eventually I asked Claude to port it to Python to make it easier to maintain. Now every month or so Claude dissects the Claude Code binary and integrates the script with the newest version. https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/%7E/.lo...
In Identity verification on Claude
> I only ever run Claude Code inside virtual machines. It's as isolated as it can possibly be. Right, but you still need to connect that virtual machine to their service/servers in order to actually accomplish anything. This change doesn't move the needle of where you were before. > Went out of my way to patch the ELF itself because the prompts are hard coded. Why even pay for Claude Code at that point? CC is MORE expensive than many competitors, but it is popular because they take care of all the hard parts, creating a very high quality "turn key" product. If you're putting in all this effort, may have well just use OpenCode and one of many API vendors. > They're literally injecting strings from the network into the system prompt. If it's not prompt injection, then I have no idea what it is. I agree you have no idea what prompt injection
Read the rest
is. Here is the Wikipedia Article's first line (which I agree with, as a definition): > Prompt injection is a cybersecurity exploit and an attack vector in which innocuous-looking inputs (i.e. prompts) are designed to cause unintended behavior in machine learning models, particularly large language models (LLMs). Anthropic are sending down a system prompt to their proprietary software from their proprietary service. It isn't an exploit, isn't an attack vector, and isn't unintended or unexpected. > I can only tell you what I'm doing. Here you go: https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/%7E/.lo... Those seem like pretty reasonable changes to the prompt. Why is altering the system prompt more effective than instructions after?
In Tell HN: Claude Code now allows Anthropic to remotely inject system prompts
> you're kind of trusting Anthropic a LOT already Mitigated. I took the time to thoroughly firejail Claude Code when I first ran it on my machine. Now I only ever run Claude Code inside virtual machines. It's as isolated as it can possibly be. > Why does moving the system prompt from within their proprietary software, to their proprietary backend, matter at all for Claude Code users? Because I don't want to allow any way for them to inject stupidity inducing "lol don't think so much" instructions into Claude's system prompt. Went out of my way to patch the ELF itself because the prompts are hard coded. This prompt injection mechanism bypasses my patcher. > It doesn't feel like "hack the Claude Code binary to alter how it works" is a common and or supported use-case. Supported or not, tools like tweakcc have lots of users. > I'm also not s
Read the rest
ure if this meets the common definition of "prompt injection." They're literally injecting strings from the network into the system prompt. If it's not prompt injection, then I have no idea what it is. > My gut tells me there is something else going on, leading people to hack the Claude Code prompt/binary. And that the "something else" isn't supported by Anthropic. No idea what others are doing. I can only tell you what I'm doing. Here you go: https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/%7E/.lo...
In Tell HN: Claude Code now allows Anthropic to remotely inject system prompts
I just committed the skill to my dotfiles repository. https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/tree/master/~/.clau... There are many "critics", one for each quality I want reviewed. Correctness, consistency, maintainability, security, testing... Everything I could think of, and I keep adding more. https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/tree/master/~/.clau... The scrutinize skill is the entry point. The Opus I'm talking to becomes an agent coordinator. He explores and autodiscovers the project's structure, subdivides it into logical sections. Then he runs a truly absurd critic x section matrix against the entire project. Literally hundreds of these agents running in parallel, each focusing on one area. Ten minutes of this is enough to exhaust my Max 5x five hour window and put a serious dent in the weekly usage numbers. It literally take
Read the rest
s days to run a full agent sweep. I designed it around the rate limiting. The agents do file system style journaling in order to resume cleanly. They commit all of their findings as they go into an orphan branch in the repository. Further review runs can build on it and avoid searching for known issues. The way it works in practice is I just run /scrutinize sweep and then go work on something else, or just go do my actual job, live my life, play video games, write an article for my blog or something. Come back five hours later to either resume the process or check the literally hundreds of issues that have been found by all the agents. Then Claude and myself will go in and evaluate and fix all of those issues one by one. Then review again. Then evaluate/fix again. I'm just gonna keep looping this over and over until zero issues are found. For all of my projects. Going from solo hobbyist programmer to this was pretty insane. I can only imagine what these corporations with infinite money must be doing.
In Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses
It's mostly so I can immediately see which targets are phonies. Every phony has a line directly above it adding it to the list of phonies. When a makefile gets complex enough we need all the help we can get. I use phony targets so much I wrote a shell script to parse the makefile database dump into some sort of help text. It doesn't depend on that variable at all. https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/~/.loca... Prints output like: phony1 phony2 dependency1 dependency2
In I Like Makefiles
Makefiles are an eerily lisplike turing tarpit. I hand wrote the makefiles for my projects, they generate wonderfully organized build trees. Hell I use makefiles to manage my dotfiles repository, even blogged about it. https://www.matheusmoreira.com/articles/managing-dotfiles-wi... The sanest way I've found to write makefiles is to think of it as a tool that maps input paths to output paths. When compiling a program, I want to map source/program.c to build/$(config)/objects/program.o so I write pattern rules that do just that. $(directories.build.objects)/%.o: $(directories.source)/%.c | directories $(strip $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ -c $<) Then I write make functions to convert paths in some tree to paths in another tree, which makes it easy to create lists of files which then match the pattern rules. source_to_object = $(patsu
Read the rest
bst $(directories.source)/%.c,$(directories.build.objects)/%.o,$(1)) These functions are then augmented by lots and lots of project specific variables to organize things... directories.source := source directories.build.root := build directories.build := $(directories.build.root)/$(config) directories.build.objects := $(directories.build)/objects sources.program := $(shell find $(directories.source) -type f) objects.program := $(call source_to_object,$(sources.program)) Then I add a real target which is supposed to get the makefile going. targets.program := $(directories.build)/program $(targets.program): $(objects.program) | directories $(strip $(CC) $(CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@ $^) Then I add a phony target for it. targets.phony += program program: $(targets.program) .PHONY: $(targets.phony) Then typing "make program" triggers the rule to make build/$(config)/program which depends on all the object files which will be linked into it which in turn is derived from a dynamically computed list of source files, and making those object files triggers the pattern rule which builds the entire thing. Using make without phony targets is insane. Without phony targets, I'd need to type things like "make build/aarch64/program" in order to get a build started. So I use phony targets for everything. Much easier to type "make program". It got to the point I created a phony-targets shell script which parses make's database output and processes it into a sort of help text for any given makefile's phony targets interface: https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/~/.loca...
In I Like Makefiles
I (ab)use make to manage my dotfiles. https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/GNUmake... I'm surprised at how well this thing works every time I use it. I even blogged about it. https://www.matheusmoreira.com/articles/managing-dotfiles-wi... Recently made a tool that processes the make database and prints the phony targets and their dependencies: https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/master/~/.loca... I use it as a sort of makefile help command. Works surprisingly well too.
In How I stopped worrying and loved Makefiles
Android allows you to swap the virtual keyboard. I use unexpected keyboard which is also free software. It's excellent for programming. Before that I used Hacker's Keyboard which has actual arrow keys. Termux also has a configurable bar at the bottom where you can map any keys you want. I use it for function and arrow keys plus a bunch of common symbols. Here's an example from my dotfiles: https://github.com/matheusmoreira/.files/blob/38565320fefb92...
In deVStudio – Runs VS Code on Android

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.