What the data for this category looks like
Data for this category centers on the end-to-end security review process for penetration testing and code changes. Sources include target business systems, public vulnerability databases, output from automated scanners, and manual verification records from red team engineers. Daily produced documents include test authorization letters, penetration test reports, vulnerability reproduction records, and rectification suggestions. Each document contains fields such as authorization scope, vulnerability ID, reproduction steps, and risk level. Data updates follow individual test project cycles, or synchronize with major version iterations of target systems. Core data is gradually accumulated as testing progresses.
What constraints these characteristics impose on the multi-turn dialogue and prompt engineering link
Data for this category is scattered and requires manual verification. Multi-turn dialogue must support cross-document context association, and avoid repeatedly retrieving irrelevant vulnerability or code change-related information. Single-project data update cycles are clearly defined. Prompts must adapt to the field formats of project-specific documents, and do not require frequent adjustments to general templates. Test authorization confirmation and vulnerability verification are core time-consuming steps. Multi-turn dialogue must support segmented confirmation of authorization scope and step-by-step breakdown of vulnerability verification procedures, to reduce repeated input. Field requirements for rectification suggestions require dialogue output to strictly match document formats, avoid generating non-standard content, and prevent vulnerability omissions or authorization disputes.
How to configure settings
The following configurations are based on FastGPT v4.17.0.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum context length | 8000–12000 token | Adapts to the total length of single-project documents such as penetration test reports and authorization letters, and avoids truncating critical authorization and vulnerability information |
messages context window | First 6 conversation turns | Matches typical interaction rounds for single-project testing, retains critical context for authorization confirmation and vulnerability reproduction steps |
variables custom variables | Project ID, vulnerability database version | Binds single-project exclusive data, ensures prompts call the correct cycle vulnerability database and project documents |
chatId session binding | Bind by project ID | Isolates dialogue contexts for different test projects, avoids cross-project data confusion |
| Conversation timeout | 600 seconds | Adapts to the longer interaction duration of manual verification steps, prevents timeouts while waiting for verification results |
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Symptom: After setting the
messagescontext window to 6, the dialogue still cannot associate with the previous question. Cause:chatIdsession isolation is not correctly implemented, causing the context window to reset. - Symptom: Key code change-related information extracted from user dialogue is displayed as garbled text. Cause: No encoding parameter for the corresponding document is configured in
variables, leading to encoding mismatches when reading authorization letters and reproduction records across documents. - Symptom: Performance anomalies occur after embedding a large number of inactive chat windows via iframe. Cause: No session idle recycling rules are configured, causing
chatIdresource usage to accumulate continuously and affecting overall performance.
How to Verify Proper Configuration
- Initiate the first dialogue for a single-project test, input a question related to the test authorization letter, and check whether the dialogue output includes the authorization scope field.
- Conduct 6 consecutive questions related to vulnerability reproduction or code changes, and verify whether the dialogue can associate vulnerability IDs or change content mentioned in previous rounds.
- Import test authorization letters and vulnerability reports for a single project, and check whether
variablesare correctly bound to project-specific identifiers. - Simulate embedding multiple session windows via iframe, verify that resource usage has no abnormal fluctuations, and adjust idle recycling thresholds to match business scale.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-10-19.