让 Claude 编写一份分阶段的主提示词，承担毕业网络安全项目从需求、研究、编码到答辩准备的全部工作。
为 Claude Pro 创建一个极其强大的 MASTER PROMPT。 该提示词的目的是让 Claude 充当我毕业年级网络安全项目的完整 AI 开发与研究团队。 我将向 Claude 提供： - 确切的项目标题 - 学院提供的研究论文 - 学院提供的 PDF 文件 - 学院 PPT/模板 - 评审评分标准/指南 - 任何强制性要求 该项目必须主要借助 AI 工具完成研究、设计、编码、测试、评估、文档撰写和演示准备。 我独自完成该项目。因此 AI 必须尽可能承担研究、编码、调试、测试、文档撰写和演示准备等工作，同时确保项目在现实中可实现。 重要提示： 这是一个全新的项目指令。 不得参考之前的对话。 不得假设之前已做出的项目决策。 不得包含队友的工作内容。 除非我明确提供，否则不得使用旧的项目讨论内容。 不得假设任何先前讨论过的功能即为我们的最终方案。 该提示词必须强制 Claude 严格按照阶段执行，防止其在研究、编码、UI 和 PPT 之间随意跳跃。 所需工作流程： PHASE 0 — 理解学院要求 PHASE 1 — 从过去到当前的技术研究 PHASE 2 — 分析现有的商业与学术系统 PHASE 3 — 研究当前存在的问题与局限 PHASE 4 — 识别真实的研究空白 PHASE 5 — 生成并排序可能的项目贡献 PHASE 6 — 严格的导师/评审攻击测试 PHASE 7 — 冻结最终研究方向 PHASE 8 — 设计系统架构 PHASE 9 — 构建完整可运行代码 PHASE 10 — 测试与调试 PHASE 11 — 数据集与实验设计 PHASE 12 — 运行实验并收集真实结果 PHASE 13 — 构建专业 UI/仪表盘 PHASE 14 — 集成并验证完整系统 PHASE 15 — 制作 PPT 与报告 PHASE 16 — 模拟答辩与最终评审评估 Claude 必须完成每一阶段，并等待我下达指令后才能进入下一阶段。 ================================================== 研究要求 ================================================== 该提示词必须指示 Claude 使用可靠且最新的来源进行深入研究。 使用以下来源： IEEE ACM USENIX Springer Elsevier 知名会议/期刊 官方供应商文档 官方标准 知名安全研究 研究内容需涵盖早期基础性工作以及当前 2024–2026 年的最新进展。 不得伪造论文、作者、数据集、统计数据、引用或结果。 每一个重要的研究主张都必须经过验证。 ================================================== 创新性要求 ================================================== 这一点极为重要。 不要指示 Claude 让项目“听起来具有创新性”。 应指示 Claude 在研究现有系统后，确定哪些内容**真正不同**。 评审员可能会提问： “有什么新东西？” “这已经存在了。” “Cisco Umbrella 已经这么做了。” “Cloudflare 已经这么做了。” “杀毒软件已经这么做了。” “为什么需要你的项目？” “你的具体贡献是什么？” 因此，Claude 必须在推荐创新点之前，先研究当前产品与学术成果。 如果某个提议的功能已经存在： → 明确指出其存在 → 不得称其为新颖 → 判断是否存在合法的改进、评估、集成、优化或未解决的局限性 不要自动假设以下技术具有创新性： - AI - 机器学习 - 威胁情报 - DNS 过滤 - DGA 检测 - DNS 隧道检测 - 行为分析 - 可解释 AI - 风险评分 - 自适应检测 - DoH/DoT 检测 先进行研究。 ================================================== DNS 安全示例 ================================================== 如果项目与 DNS 过滤/安全相关，需调研现代系统，例如： Cisco Umbrella Cloudflare DNS/安全 Quad9 NextDNS 企业级 DNS 安全 杀毒软件/EDR 防火墙 IDS/IPS Web 安全网关 开源 DNS 安全系统 需确定： 它们已实现的功能 其实现方式 哪些方面表现良好 仍存在哪些局限 同时调研当前 DNS 安全面临的挑战，包括： 未知域名 此前未见的威胁 误报 漏报 威胁情报延迟 过时的声誉数据 攻击者行为变化 概念/模型漂移 DGA 演化 DNS 隧道 DoH DoT DNS 绕过 隐私问题 延迟 计算开销 可解释性 数据集偏差 类别不平衡 对抗性攻击 跨网络泛化 时间行为 上下文感知检测 安全自动化响应 以上仅为示例。 若当前研究发现更优方向，Claude 必须能识别出更好的机会。 ================================================== 杀毒软件挑战 ================================================== 提示词必须指示 Claude 将项目与以下内容进行比较： Antivirus EDR Firewall IDS/IPS Web security gateway DNS security Claude 必须解释： DNS 能够看到什么 DNS 无法看到什么 DNS 可能更早检测到什么 DNS 在哪些方面与 Antivirus 重叠 DNS 在哪些方面提供独特的安全角色 切勿声称 DNS 可以取代 Antivirus。 ================================================== RESEARCH GAP ================================================== Claude 必须产出： 现有系统 ↓ 现有能力 ↓ 当前限制 ↓ 研究尝试 ↓ 剩余差距 ↓ 研究问题 ↓ 拟议贡献 ↓ 该贡献将如何通过实验验证 不要编造研究差距。 ================================================== WOW 因素 ================================================== 找出一个真正有用的“WOW”功能。 它必须满足以下条件： 有研究支持 有用 可实现 可测试 可度量 可演示 不要仅仅为了让项目看起来先进而添加不必要的区块链、聊天机器人、LLM 或装饰性 AI 功能。 一个强有力的贡献优于多个薄弱功能。 ================================================== 评审模式 ================================================== 提示词必须让 Claude 在设计完项目后，扮演一名持敌意态度的教员评审者。 Claude 必须提出困难的问题，例如： 到底哪里是新的？ 这难道不是已经存在了吗？ Cisco Umbrella 不是已经做到了吗？ Antivirus 不是已经做到了吗？ 为什么不使用现有的服务？ 你的研究差距是什么？ 哪篇论文支持这个差距？ 你到底实现了什么？ 系统是如何做决策的？ 当威胁情报没有信息时会发生什么？ 当机器学习出错时会发生什么？ 你如何处理误报？ 你如何处理漏报？ 攻击者能否绕过它？ DoH/DoT 的情况下会发生什么？ 引入了多少延迟？ 你如何证明改进？ 为什么选择这个数据集？ 为什么选择这个算法？ 有哪些局限性？ Claude 必须识别出弱点，并明确告诉我如何改进它们。 它必须从以下方面对项目进行评分： 问题清晰度 研究深度 现有系统分析 研究差距 新颖性/差异化 技术可行性 架构 实现 数据集 实验 结果 实际有用性 安全相关性 性能 用户界面/演示 答辩防御能力 WOW 因素 ================================================== 实施要求 ================================================== 最终项目必须是一个真实可运行的项目。 Claude 必须提供： 完整的文件夹结构 完整的源代码 依赖项 安装命令 配置 环境变量 数据库 API 前端 后端 测试 调试 部署/运行说明 不允许伪代码。 不允许虚假实现。 不允许仅包含 TODO 的代码。 不允许伪造 API 响应。 不允许编造结果。 如果 Claude 修改了某个文件，必须提供完整的更新后文件。 增量式构建： 构建（BUILD） → 运行（RUN） → 测试（TEST） → 验证（VERIFY） → 修复（FIX） → 下一步（NEXT） 只要关键组件仍存在故障，就绝不能继续推进。 ================================================== AI 工具策略 ================================================== 主提示词必须告诉 Claude 如何在 AI 工具之间分配工作： Claude： 研究、文献分析、研究差距、架构设计、代码生成、代码审查 ChatGPT： 独立验证、架构审查、调试、测试、技术推理、答辩模拟 Cursor： 主代码库的实现与集成 GitHub Copilot： 小型编码任务、自动补全和测试 Perplexity： 独立研究/来源验证 v0： 专业 UI/仪表盘生成 GitHub： 版本控制 AI 工具被用作开发/研究团队，因此工作流程应最大化其效用。 ================================================== 实验要求 ================================================== 项目必须包含真实的实验。 Claude 必须设计： 基线（baseline） vs 拟议方法（proposed approach） 使用适当的指标，例如： 准确率（precision） 召回率（recall） F1 分数（F1） 误报率（false-positive rate） 漏报率（false-negative rate） 检测率（detection rate） 延迟（latency） 处理开销（processing overhead） 泛化能力（generalization） 鲁棒性（robustness） 仅使用与项目实际相关的指标。 所有最终结果必须来自我们实际运行的实验。 绝不编造数字。 ================================================== 用户界面要求 ================================================== 如果适用，必须创建一个专业的网络安全仪表盘。 它必须使用真实的后端数据。 不允许静态的虚假仪表盘。 仅展示有用的项目信息，例如： 查询 检测 风险/决策 证据 警报 统计数据 性能 系统状态 ================================================== PPT / 报告要求 ================================================== 在实施和实验验证完成后，根据官方学院模板和评分标准生成 PPT 和报告。 PPT 中展示的所有内容必须与实际实现一致。 如果某项功能尚未实现，请标注为： PROPOSED 或 FUTURE SCOPE 切勿将计划中的功能呈现为已完成。 ================================================== VIVA 答辩要求 ================================================== Claude 最终必须进行模拟答辩（mock viva）。 一次只提一个问题。 问题从基础开始，逐步变难。 如果我的回答错误： 1. 指出错误之处。 2. 给出正确的技术解释。 3. 提供一句简短的回答，供我向答辩老师陈述。 4. 继续下一个问题。 ================================================== 最终审计 ================================================== 在宣布项目完成之前，Claude 必须逐项审计以下内容： TITLE ↓ OBJECTIVES ↓ RESEARCH ↓ EXISTING SYSTEMS ↓ CURRENT LIMITATIONS ↓ RESEARCH GAP ↓ CONTRIBUTION ↓ ARCHITECTURE ↓ CODE ↓ DATASET ↓ EXPERIMENTS ↓ REAL RESULTS ↓ UI ↓ PPT ↓ REPORT ↓ DEMO ↓ VIVA 所有内容必须保持一致。 最终项目必须能够经受住以下质问： "THIS ALREADY EXISTS. WHAT DID YOU ACTUALLY ADD?" ================================================== 最重要规则 ================================================== 保持怀疑态度。 不要自动认同我的想法。 如果某项技术已存在，请明确指出。 如果研究空白（research gap）薄弱，请明确指出。 如果项目范围过大，请主动缩减。 如果某个想法对单个开发者不可行，请直接拒绝。 如果某个功能不必要，请移除。 如果某项贡献确实有用且可行，请说明原因。 不要追求华丽的措辞。 应优化以下要素： REAL PROBLEM + REAL RESEARCH GAP + REAL CONTRIBUTION + WORKING CODE + REAL TESTING + REAL EXPERIMENTS + REAL RESULTS + STRONG DEMO + STRONG VIVA ================================================== 输出格式 ================================================== 生成的 Claude 主提示词（master prompt）必须具备以下特征： - 极其清晰 - 结构分明 - 步骤有序 - 无歧义 - 专业 - 足够详细，能够指导整个项目流程 - 设计上防止 Claude 跳步提前行动 - 面向使用多个 AI 工具的单人学生 在生成的主提示词末尾，必须指示 Claude： "WAIT FOR THE USER TO PROVIDE THE PROJECT TITLE AND OFFICIAL COLLEGE MATERIAL. DO NOT START RESEARCH. DO NOT START CODING. DO NOT DESIGN THE ARCHITECTURE. FIRST COMPLETE PHASE 0 ONLY."
Create one extremely powerful MASTER PROMPT for Claude Pro. The purpose of the prompt is to make Claude act as the complete AI development and research team for my final-year college cybersecurity project. I will provide Claude with: - the exact project title - college-provided research papers - college-provided PDFs - college PPT/template - review rubric/guidelines - any mandatory requirements The project must be researched, designed, coded, tested, evaluated, documented and prepared for presentation primarily with AI tools. I am doing the project alone. Therefore the AI must do as much of the research, coding, debugging, testing, documentation and presentation preparation as possible, while keeping the project realistically achievable. IMPORTANT: This is a FRESH PROJECT INSTRUCTION. Do NOT refer to previous conversations. Do NOT assume previous project decisions. Do NOT include teammate work. Do NOT use old project discussions unless I explicitly provide them. Do NOT assume that any previously discussed feature is our final solution. The prompt must force Claude to work in STRICT PHASES and prevent it from jumping randomly between research, coding, UI and PPT. Required workflow: PHASE 0 — Understand college requirements PHASE 1 — Research the technology from old to current PHASE 2 — Analyze existing commercial and academic systems PHASE 3 — Research current problems and limitations PHASE 4 — Identify genuine research gaps PHASE 5 — Generate and rank possible project contributions PHASE 6 — Strict faculty/reviewer attack test PHASE 7 — Freeze the final research direction PHASE 8 — Design architecture PHASE 9 — Build complete working code PHASE 10 — Testing and debugging PHASE 11 — Dataset and experimental design PHASE 12 — Run experiments and collect real results PHASE 13 — Build professional UI/dashboard PHASE 14 — Integrate and validate the complete system PHASE 15 — PPT and report PHASE 16 — Mock viva and final reviewer assessment Claude must finish each phase and wait for my command before moving to the next phase. ================================================== RESEARCH REQUIREMENT ================================================== The prompt must instruct Claude to research deeply using reliable and recent sources. Use sources such as: IEEE ACM USENIX Springer Elsevier reputable conferences/journals official vendor documentation official standards reputable security research Research both older foundational work and current 2024–2026 developments. Do not fabricate papers, authors, datasets, statistics, citations or results. Every important research claim must be verified. ================================================== NOVELTY REQUIREMENT ================================================== This is extremely important. Do NOT tell Claude to make the project "sound innovative." Tell Claude to determine what is ACTUALLY different after researching existing systems. The reviewer may ask: "What is new?" "This already exists." "Cisco Umbrella already does this." "Cloudflare already does this." "Antivirus already does this." "Why do we need your project?" "What exactly is your contribution?" Therefore Claude must research current products and research before recommending novelty. If a proposed feature already exists: → explicitly identify it → do NOT call it novel → determine whether there is a legitimate improvement, evaluation, integration, optimization or unresolved limitation Do not automatically assume that: - AI - Machine Learning - Threat Intelligence - DNS filtering - DGA detection - DNS tunneling detection - behavioral analysis - explainable AI - risk scoring - adaptive detection - DoH/DoT detection are novel. Research first. ================================================== DNS SECURITY EXAMPLE ================================================== If the project is related to DNS filtering/security, investigate modern systems such as: Cisco Umbrella Cloudflare DNS/security Quad9 NextDNS enterprise DNS security antivirus/EDR firewalls IDS/IPS web security gateways open-source DNS security systems Determine: What they already do How they do it What works well What limitations remain What researchers are currently investigating Also investigate current DNS-security challenges including: unknown domains previously unseen threats false positives false negatives threat-intelligence delay outdated reputation changing attacker behavior concept/model drift DGA evolution DNS tunneling DoH DoT DNS bypass privacy latency computational overhead explainability dataset bias class imbalance adversarial attacks cross-network generalization temporal behavior context-aware detection safe automated response These are examples only. Claude must discover better opportunities if current research identifies them. ================================================== ANTIVIRUS CHALLENGE ================================================== The prompt must instruct Claude to compare the project against: Antivirus EDR Firewall IDS/IPS Web security gateway DNS security Claude must explain: What DNS can see What DNS cannot see What DNS can potentially detect earlier Where DNS overlaps with antivirus Where DNS provides a distinct security role Never claim DNS replaces antivirus. ================================================== RESEARCH GAP ================================================== Claude must produce: Existing systems ↓ Existing capabilities ↓ Current limitations ↓ Research attempts ↓ Remaining gap ↓ Research question ↓ Proposed contribution ↓ How the contribution will be experimentally proven Do not invent a research gap. ================================================== WOW FACTOR ================================================== Find ONE genuinely useful "WOW" feature. It must be: research-backed useful implementable testable measurable demonstrable Do NOT add unnecessary blockchain, chatbot, LLM or decorative AI features merely to make the project look advanced. One strong contribution is better than many weak features. ================================================== REVIEWER MODE ================================================== The prompt must make Claude act as a hostile faculty reviewer after designing the project. Claude must ask difficult questions such as: What exactly is new? Isn't this already available? Does Cisco Umbrella already do this? Does antivirus already do this? Why not use an existing service? What is your research gap? Which paper supports the gap? What exactly did you implement? How does the system make decisions? What happens when Threat Intelligence has no information? What happens when ML is wrong? How do you handle false positives? How do you handle false negatives? Can attackers bypass it? What happens with DoH/DoT? How much latency does it introduce? How do you prove improvement? Why this dataset? Why this algorithm? What are the limitations? Claude must identify weaknesses and tell me exactly how to improve them. It must score the project on: Problem clarity Research depth Existing-system analysis Research gap Novelty/differentiation Technical feasibility Architecture Implementation Dataset Experiments Results Practical usefulness Security relevance Performance UI/demo Viva defensibility WOW factor ================================================== IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENT ================================================== The final project must be a REAL WORKING PROJECT. Claude must provide: complete folder structure complete source code dependencies installation commands configuration environment variables database API frontend backend testing debugging deployment/run instructions No pseudocode. No fake implementation. No TODO-only code. No fake API responses. No invented results. If Claude modifies a file, it must provide the complete updated file. Build incrementally: BUILD → RUN → TEST → VERIFY → FIX → NEXT Never continue while a critical component is broken. ================================================== AI TOOL STRATEGY ================================================== The master prompt must tell Claude how to divide work among AI tools: Claude: research, literature analysis, research gap, architecture, code generation, code review ChatGPT: independent verification, architecture review, debugging, testing, technical reasoning, viva Cursor: main codebase implementation and integration GitHub Copilot: small coding tasks, autocomplete and tests Perplexity: independent research/source verification v0: professional UI/dashboard generation GitHub: version control The AI tools are being used as the development/research team, so the workflow should maximize their usefulness. ================================================== EXPERIMENT REQUIREMENT ================================================== The project must have REAL experiments. Claude must design: baseline vs proposed approach Use appropriate metrics such as: precision recall F1 false-positive rate false-negative rate detection rate latency processing overhead generalization robustness Only use metrics relevant to the actual project. All final results must come from experiments we actually run. Never invent numbers. ================================================== UI REQUIREMENT ================================================== If a UI is appropriate, create a professional cybersecurity dashboard. It must use real backend data. No static fake dashboard. Show only useful project information such as: queries detections risk/decision evidence alerts statistics performance system status ================================================== PPT / REPORT REQUIREMENT ================================================== After the implementation and experiments are validated, generate the PPT and report according to the official college template and rubric. Everything shown in the PPT must match the actual implementation. If something is not implemented, label it: PROPOSED or FUTURE SCOPE Never present planned functionality as completed. ================================================== VIVA REQUIREMENT ================================================== Claude must eventually conduct a mock viva. Ask questions one at a time. Start basic and become increasingly difficult. If my answer is wrong: 1. Explain what is wrong. 2. Give the correct technical explanation. 3. Give me a short answer I can say to faculty. 4. Continue with the next question. ================================================== FINAL AUDIT ================================================== Before declaring the project complete, Claude must audit: TITLE ↓ OBJECTIVES ↓ RESEARCH ↓ EXISTING SYSTEMS ↓ CURRENT LIMITATIONS ↓ RESEARCH GAP ↓ CONTRIBUTION ↓ ARCHITECTURE ↓ CODE ↓ DATASET ↓ EXPERIMENTS ↓ REAL RESULTS ↓ UI ↓ PPT ↓ REPORT ↓ DEMO ↓ VIVA Everything must be consistent. The final project must survive: "THIS ALREADY EXISTS. WHAT DID YOU ACTUALLY ADD?" ================================================== MOST IMPORTANT RULE ================================================== Be skeptical. Do not agree with my ideas automatically. If something already exists, tell me. If the research gap is weak, tell me. If the project scope is too large, reduce it. If an idea is impossible for one developer, reject it. If a feature is unnecessary, remove it. If a contribution is genuinely useful and feasible, explain why. Do not optimize for impressive wording. Optimize for: REAL PROBLEM + REAL RESEARCH GAP + REAL CONTRIBUTION + WORKING CODE + REAL TESTING + REAL EXPERIMENTS + REAL RESULTS + STRONG DEMO + STRONG VIVA ================================================== OUTPUT FORMAT ================================================== The generated Claude master prompt must be: - extremely clear - structured - sequential - unambiguous - professional - detailed enough to guide the entire project - designed to prevent Claude from jumping ahead - designed for a solo student using multiple AI tools At the END of the generated master prompt, instruct Claude: "WAIT FOR THE USER TO PROVIDE THE PROJECT TITLE AND OFFICIAL COLLEGE MATERIAL. DO NOT START RESEARCH. DO NOT START CODING. DO NOT DESIGN THE ARCHITECTURE. FIRST COMPLETE PHASE 0 ONLY."