Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

compliance-audit(合规审核)

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

compliance-audit 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为只读;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 47,174。

总安装 745周安装 32GitHub Stars 15下载 261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
unknown

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:compliance-audit(合规审核)
来源仓库:https://github.com/nickcrew/claude-ctx-plugin
仓库路径:skills/compliance-audit
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/nickcrew/claude-ctx-plugin --skill compliance-audit
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 npx skills 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。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/nickcrew/claude-ctx-plugin --skill compliance-audit

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。

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查,适合梳理敏感配置或生成安全复核清单。它支持 GDPR、HIPAA、PCI DSS、SOC 2、ISO 27001 等框架的合规评估与差距分析。使用时不能将工具输出直接作为最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌或生产系统时应先确认最小权限和操作边界。

安装前建议核实权限范围、维护状态及是否会触发联网或文件读写操作。compliance-audit 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/compliance-audit

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 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;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 npx skills add https://github.com/nickcrew/claude-ctx-plugin --skill compliance-…;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

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

compliance-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/nickcrew/claude-ctx-plugin --skill compliance-audit。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

compliance-audit 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。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。

compliance-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

compliance-audit 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

compliance-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 745 次,近一周安装 32 次,下载 261 次,GitHub 15 星。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。

compliance-audit 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 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 Codex,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。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 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
compliance-audit

合规审核 · 本页

74515只读未明确有提醒

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

Compliance Audit

Systematic regulatory compliance auditing with automated evidence collection, control mapping, gap analysis, and remediation planning across major compliance frameworks.

When to Use This Skill

  • Conducting compliance assessments for GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2, or ISO 27001
  • Preparing for external audits or certifications
  • Building or validating compliance control frameworks
  • Automating evidence collection and audit trail maintenance
  • Performing gap analysis against regulatory requirements
  • Creating remediation plans for compliance deficiencies
  • Evaluating third-party vendor compliance posture

Quick Reference

ResourcePurposeLoad when
references/frameworks.mdKey requirements, control mappings, and certification paths for GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2, ISO 27001Scoping which regulations apply
references/evidence-collection.mdAutomated evidence gathering, artifact organization, retention policies, audit trail patternsSetting up or running evidence collection
references/gap-analysis.mdControl mapping methodology, gap identification, risk scoring, remediation planningAnalyzing compliance gaps

Workflow Overview

Phase 1: Scope       → Identify applicable regulations, data types, and geographical scope
Phase 2: Assess      → Map controls, review policies, analyze data flows, test implementations
Phase 3: Evidence    → Collect and organize audit artifacts automatically
Phase 4: Gap Analyze → Identify control gaps, score risks, prioritize findings
Phase 5: Remediate   → Create remediation plans, assign owners, set timelines
Phase 6: Report      → Generate audit-ready documentation and compliance dashboards
Phase 7: Monitor     → Establish continuous compliance monitoring and drift detection

Phase 1: Scope the Audit

Determine the regulatory landscape before testing anything.

Key questions:

  • What data types does the system process (PII, PHI, cardholder data)?
  • What jurisdictions apply (EU, US states, industry-specific)?
  • What existing controls and certifications are in place?
  • What is the audit history and any prior findings?

Applicability matrix:

FrameworkApplies when
GDPRProcessing personal data of EU residents
HIPAAHandling protected health information (PHI)
PCI DSSStoring, processing, or transmitting cardholder data
SOC 2Providing services where trust principles matter
ISO 27001Organization wants certified ISMS
CCPA/CPRACollecting California consumer personal information
NIST CSFFederal systems or voluntary cybersecurity framework adoption

Phase 2: Assess Current State

Control Inventory

Map existing controls against the applicable framework requirements:

  1. Enumerate all technical controls (encryption, access control, logging)
  2. Enumerate all administrative controls (policies, training, procedures)
  3. Enumerate all physical controls (facility access, media handling)
  4. Map each control to specific framework requirements
  5. Test control effectiveness through sampling and verification

Data Flow Analysis

  • Map data ingress, processing, storage, and egress points
  • Identify data classification for each flow
  • Document lawful basis for processing (GDPR)
  • Verify data minimization and purpose limitation
  • Review cross-border transfer mechanisms

Policy Review

  • Assess policy coverage against framework requirements
  • Verify policy distribution and acknowledgment
  • Check policy version control and update cadence
  • Validate exception management processes

Phase 3: Evidence Collection

Load references/evidence-collection.md for detailed patterns.

Automation priorities:

  1. Configuration exports from cloud providers and infrastructure
  2. Access control lists and permission matrices
  3. Log retention and monitoring dashboards
  4. Vulnerability scan results and patch status
  5. Training completion records
  6. Incident response test results

Artifact organization:

evidence/
  {framework}/
    {control-id}/
      artifact-{date}.{ext}
      metadata.yaml           # source, collection method, timestamp

Phase 4: Gap Analysis

Load references/gap-analysis.md for the full methodology.

For each framework requirement:

  1. Map to existing controls (full, partial, or none)
  2. Assess implementation effectiveness
  3. Score the gap by risk impact and likelihood
  4. Categorize as documentation, process, technology, or training gap
  5. Prioritize based on risk score and remediation effort

Phase 5: Remediation Planning

For each identified gap:

FieldContent
Gap IDUnique identifier
Framework RequirementSpecific clause or control
Current StateWhat exists today
Target StateWhat compliance requires
Remediation ActionSpecific steps to close the gap
OwnerResponsible person/team
PriorityP0-P4 based on risk score
TimelineTarget completion date
DependenciesOther gaps or actions this depends on

Phase 6: Reporting

Generate audit-ready documentation:

  • Executive summary: Compliance posture, key risks, readiness score
  • Technical findings: Detailed control assessment results
  • Risk matrix: Heat map of gaps by severity and likelihood
  • Remediation roadmap: Prioritized timeline with owners
  • Evidence package: Organized artifacts indexed to controls
  • Compliance attestation: Framework-specific certification readiness

Phase 7: Continuous Monitoring

Establish ongoing compliance posture management:

  • Configure automated scanning for drift detection
  • Set alert thresholds for control degradation
  • Schedule periodic re-assessment cadence
  • Track remediation progress against timelines
  • Maintain metric dashboards (control coverage, evidence freshness, audit readiness)

Core Principles

  1. Evidence over assertion — every compliance claim must be backed by verifiable artifacts
  2. Automate first — manual evidence collection does not scale and introduces errors
  3. Risk-based prioritization — address the highest-risk gaps first
  4. Continuous posture — compliance is a state, not a one-time event
  5. Defense in depth — layer controls so single-point failures do not cause non-compliance

Anti-Patterns

  • Treating compliance as a checkbox exercise without testing control effectiveness
  • Collecting evidence manually when automation is available
  • Ignoring gaps because "we've always done it this way"
  • Waiting until audit season to gather evidence
  • Conflating compliance with security (compliance is a subset)
  • Skipping third-party/vendor compliance assessments

平台分布

Codex

33.36%
按下载量换算87

Claude

32.95%
按下载量换算86

Cursor

20.43%
按下载量换算53

Gemini CLI

9.39%
按下载量换算25

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。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