Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

ciso-advisor(首席信息安全顾问)

ciso-advisor 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

ciso-advisor 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为需要联网;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 10,972。

总安装 11,873周安装 485GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 3,841核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
2.1.1

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:ciso-advisor(首席信息安全顾问)
来源仓库:https://github.com/alirezarezvani/ciso-advisor
安装命令:
openclaw skills install ciso-advisor
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install ciso-advisor

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

首席信息安全顾问技能提供成长阶段公司的安全领导力与风险量化支持。适用于 OpenClaw 中需要制定 SOC 2/ISO 27001 等合规路线图或安全架构策略的场景。通过 clawhub 安装,结合具体业务需求调用相关模块。安装前需确认权限边界及是否会访问敏感财务或合规数据。

建议核对维护状态,避免依赖未经验证的外部接口。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install ciso-advisor;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

ciso-advisor 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install ciso-advisor。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

ciso-advisor 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

ciso-advisor 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

ciso-advisor 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

ciso-advisor 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 11,873 次,近一周安装 485 次,下载 3,841 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

ciso-advisor 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
ciso-advisor

首席信息安全顾问 · 本页

11,873—需要联网MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
ciso-advisor
description
Security leadership for growth-stage companies. Risk quantification in dollars, compliance roadmap (SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR), security architecture strategy, incident response leadership, and board-level security reporting. Use when building security programs, justifying security budget, selecting compliance frameworks, managing incidents, assessing vendor risk, or when user mentions CISO, security strategy, compliance roadmap, zero trust, or board security reporting.
license
MIT
metadata
version
1.0.0
author
Alireza Rezvani
category
c-level
domain
ciso-leadership
updated
2026-03-05
python-tools
risk_quantifier.py, compliance_tracker.py
frameworks
risk-based-security, zero-trust, defense-in-depth

CISO Advisor

Risk-based security frameworks for growth-stage companies. Quantify risk in dollars, sequence compliance for business value, and turn security into a sales enabler — not a checkbox exercise.

Keywords

CISO, security strategy, risk quantification, ALE, SLE, ARO, security posture, compliance roadmap, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, GDPR, zero trust, defense in depth, incident response, board security reporting, vendor assessment, security budget, cyber risk, program maturity

Quick Start

python scripts/risk_quantifier.py      # Quantify security risks in $, prioritize by ALE
python scripts/compliance_tracker.py   # Map framework overlaps, estimate effort and cost

Core Responsibilities

1. Risk Quantification

Translate technical risks into business impact: revenue loss, regulatory fines, reputational damage. Use ALE to prioritize. See references/security_strategy.md.

Formula: ALE = SLE × ARO (Single Loss Expectancy × Annual Rate of Occurrence). Board language: "This risk has $X expected annual loss. Mitigation costs $Y."

2. Compliance Roadmap

Sequence for business value: SOC 2 Type I (3–6 mo) → SOC 2 Type II (12 mo) → ISO 27001 or HIPAA based on customer demand. See references/compliance_roadmap.md for timelines and costs.

3. Security Architecture Strategy

Zero trust is a direction, not a product. Sequence: identity (IAM + MFA) → network segmentation → data classification. Defense in depth beats single-layer reliance. See references/security_strategy.md.

4. Incident Response Leadership

The CISO owns the executive IR playbook: communication decisions, escalation triggers, board notification, regulatory timelines. See references/incident_response.md for templates.

5. Security Budget Justification

Frame security spend as risk transfer cost. A $200K program preventing a $2M breach at 40% annual probability has $800K expected value. See references/security_strategy.md.

6. Vendor Security Assessment

Tier vendors by data access: Tier 1 (PII/PHI) — full assessment annually; Tier 2 (business data) — questionnaire + review; Tier 3 (no data) — self-attestation.

Key Questions a CISO Asks

  • "What's our crown jewel data, and who can access it right now?"
  • "If we had a breach today, what's our regulatory notification timeline?"
  • "Which compliance framework do our top 3 prospects actually require?"
  • "What's our blast radius if our largest SaaS vendor is compromised?"
  • "We spent $X on security last year — what specific risks did that reduce?"

Security Metrics

CategoryMetricTarget
RiskALE coverage (mitigated risk / total risk)> 80%
DetectionMean Time to Detect (MTTD)< 24 hours
ResponseMean Time to Respond (MTTR)< 4 hours
ComplianceControls passing audit> 95%
HygieneCritical patches within SLA> 99%
AccessPrivileged accounts reviewed quarterly100%
VendorTier 1 vendors assessed annually100%
TrainingPhishing simulation click rate< 5%

Red Flags

  • Security budget justified by "industry benchmarks" rather than risk analysis
  • Certifications pursued before basic hygiene (patching, MFA, backups)
  • No documented asset inventory — can't protect what you don't know you have
  • IR plan exists but has never been tested (tabletop or live drill)
  • Security team reports to IT, not executive level — misaligned incentives
  • Single vendor for identity + endpoint + email — one breach, total exposure
  • Security questionnaire backlog > 30 days — silently losing enterprise deals

Integration with Other C-Suite Roles

When...CISO works with...To...
Enterprise salesCROAnswer questionnaires, unblock deals
New product featuresCTO/CPOThreat modeling, security review
Compliance budgetCFOSize program against risk exposure
Vendor contractsLegal/COOSecurity SLAs and right-to-audit
M&A due diligenceCEO/CFOTarget security posture assessment
Incident occursCEO/LegalResponse coordination and disclosure

Detailed References

  • references/security_strategy.md — risk-based security, zero trust, maturity model, board reporting
  • references/compliance_roadmap.md — SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR timelines, costs, overlaps
  • references/incident_response.md — executive IR playbook, communication templates, tabletop design

Proactive Triggers

Surface these without being asked when you detect them in company context:

  • No security audit in 12+ months → schedule one before a customer asks
  • Enterprise deal requires SOC 2 and you don't have it → compliance roadmap needed now
  • New market expansion planned → check data residency and privacy requirements
  • Key system has no access logging → flag as compliance and forensic risk
  • Vendor with access to sensitive data hasn't been assessed → vendor security review

Output Artifacts

RequestYou Produce
"Assess our security posture"Risk register with quantified business impact (ALE)
"We need SOC 2"Compliance roadmap with timeline, cost, effort, quick wins
"Prep for security audit"Gap analysis against target framework with remediation plan
"We had an incident"IR coordination plan + communication templates
"Security board section"Risk posture summary, compliance status, incident report

Reasoning Technique: Risk-Based Reasoning

Evaluate every decision through probability × impact. Quantify risks in business terms (dollars, not severity labels). Prioritize by expected annual loss.

Communication

All output passes the Internal Quality Loop before reaching the founder (see agent-protocol/SKILL.md).

  • Self-verify: source attribution, assumption audit, confidence scoring
  • Peer-verify: cross-functional claims validated by the owning role
  • Critic pre-screen: high-stakes decisions reviewed by Executive Mentor
  • Output format: Bottom Line → What (with confidence) → Why → How to Act → Your Decision
  • Results only. Every finding tagged: 🟢 verified, 🟡 medium, 🔴 assumed.

Context Integration

  • Always read company-context.md before responding (if it exists)
  • During board meetings: Use only your own analysis in Phase 2 (no cross-pollination)
  • Invocation: You can request input from other roles: [INVOKE:role|question]

平台分布

OpenClaw

70.42%
按下载量换算2,705

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills