Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 待分类

data-breach-response(数据泄露响应)

用于辅助数据整理、表格处理、CSV/Excel 分析、指标计算和图表准备。它适合让 Agent 清洗字段、汇总数据、发现异常、生成统计口径或把分析结果转成可读说明。使用时需要确认数据来源、字段含义和时间范围,避免把样本数据当全量事实;涉及敏感数据、导出文件或批量写回时,应先确认权限和脱敏边界。

data-breach-response 是待分类类 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,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在待分类类的 11,209 个 Skill 里排第 6,740。

总安装 423周安装 18GitHub Stars 103下载 148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:data-breach-response(数据泄露响应)
来源仓库:https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills
仓库路径:skills/data-breach-response
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill data-breach-response
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/borghei/claude-skills --skill data-breach-response

这个 Skill 是做什么的

这个 Skill 的分类还没最终确定,用法以来源仓库的说明为准。

依据 GDPR Art.33/34、CCPA、HIPAA 等法规制定泄露响应流程。自动计算通知时限、跟踪法定窗口期并生成证据保全清单。提供跨司法辖区的合规检查清单与法律文书起草支持。⚠️ 实验性质仅供教育参考,实际应用需咨询专业法律顾问。所有行动责任由使用者承担,禁止直接作为正式法律依据引用。

来源仓库内路径:skills/data-breach-response

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/borghei/claude-skills --skill data-breach-resp…;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

data-breach-response 怎么安装?

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

data-breach-response 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。

data-breach-response 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。

data-breach-response 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。

data-breach-response 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 423 次,近一周安装 18 次,下载 148 次,GitHub 103 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。

data-breach-response 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

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 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。
  • 需要处理待分类类任务、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。

待分类类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
infsh-cli

infsh CLI · Codex、Claude

4,374,576382权限未标注未明确未收录
ai-video-generation

AI 视频生成 · Codex、Claude

4,313,376382调用外部服务未明确有提醒
lark-openapi-explorer

云雀 OpenAPI 浏览器 · Codex、Claude

2,064,1209,011需要联网未明确有提醒
lark-workflow-standup-report

Lark 工作流程站立报告 · Codex、Claude

2,041,6328,978需要联网未明确通过
use-my-browser

使用我的浏览器 · Codex、Claude

1,848,49140操作浏览器未明确未通过
data-breach-response

数据泄露响应 · 本页

423103只读未明确通过

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

⚠️ EXPERIMENTAL — This skill is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does NOT constitute legal advice. All responsibility for usage rests with the user. Consult qualified legal professionals before acting on any output.

Data Breach Response

Incident response and legal compliance for personal data breaches under GDPR Art. 33/34, CCPA, HIPAA, NIS2, PCI DSS, and other regulations. Calculates breach severity, tracks notification deadlines, and manages response timelines.


Table of Contents

- Breach Severity Calculator - Breach Timeline Tracker


Tools

Breach Severity Calculator

Calculates ENISA breach severity score from breach parameters. Determines notification obligations based on severity verdict.

# Calculate severity from parameters
python scripts/breach_severity_calculator.py \
  --dpc 3 --ei 0.75 \
  --confidentiality 0.5 --integrity 0.25 --availability 0 \
  --malicious

# JSON output
python scripts/breach_severity_calculator.py \
  --dpc 2 --ei 0.5 --confidentiality 0.5 --json

# With T0 timestamp for countdown
python scripts/breach_severity_calculator.py \
  --dpc 3 --ei 1.0 --confidentiality 0.5 \
  --t0 "2026-04-10T08:00:00" --json

# Generate input template
python scripts/breach_severity_calculator.py --template

Output includes:

  • ENISA severity score (SE)
  • Severity verdict: LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH / VERY HIGH
  • Notification obligations (SA, data subjects, public)
  • Time remaining for GDPR 72h notification from T0

Breach Timeline Tracker

Tracks breach response timeline from T0 (moment of awareness). Records events, monitors deadlines, and generates status dashboards.

# Initialize a new breach timeline
python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py init \
  --breach-id "BR-2026-001" --t0 "2026-04-10T08:00:00" \
  --description "Unauthorized database access" \
  --output breach_timeline.json

# Record an event
python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py event \
  --timeline breach_timeline.json \
  --action "Containment team activated" --category containment

# View status dashboard
python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py status --timeline breach_timeline.json

# Check deadlines
python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py deadlines --timeline breach_timeline.json

# JSON status output
python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py status --timeline breach_timeline.json --json

Tracks:

  • GDPR 72-hour SA notification deadline
  • DPA contractual deadlines (24h / 48h processor notification)
  • NIS2 24-hour early warning and 72-hour notification
  • Completed vs. pending response actions
  • Time elapsed and time remaining per deadline

Reference Guides

ENISA Methodology

references/enisa_methodology.md

Complete ENISA breach severity methodology:

  • DPC (Data Processing Context) scoring 1-4
  • EI (Ease of Identification) scoring 0.25-1.00
  • CB (Circumstances of Breach) additive scoring
  • Formula: SE = (DPC x EI) + CB
  • Adjustments for encryption, pseudonymization, volume
  • EDPB case matching (18 reference cases)

Notification Obligations

references/notification_obligations.md

Multi-regulation notification requirements:

  • GDPR Art. 33 (SA within 72h) and Art. 34 (data subjects)
  • CCPA, HIPAA, PCI DSS, NIS2, state breach notification
  • Controller vs. Processor obligation matrix
  • Cross-border notification rules
  • AI Act Art. 62 serious incident reporting

Workflows

Workflow 1: Standard Breach Response

Step 1: Emergency check — is there <12h remaining on any deadline?
        → If yes, skip to Step 4 (emergency notification)

Step 2: Initialize breach timeline
        → python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py init --breach-id "BR-2026-001" \
          --t0 "2026-04-10T08:00:00" --description "Description"

Step 3: Calculate severity
        → python scripts/breach_severity_calculator.py --dpc N --ei N \
          --confidentiality N --integrity N --availability N [--malicious]

Step 4: Based on severity verdict, determine notifications
        → LOW (<2): Internal log only, no external notification
        → MEDIUM (2 to <3): Notify supervisory authority within 72h
        → HIGH (3 to <4): Notify SA + individual data subjects
        → VERY HIGH (>=4): Notify SA + data subjects + consider public notice

Step 5: Execute containment and record events
        → python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py event --timeline breach.json \
          --action "Action taken" --category containment

Step 6: Monitor deadlines continuously
        → python scripts/breach_timeline_tracker.py deadlines --timeline breach.json

Step 7: Complete notification obligations and document

Workflow 2: Emergency Mode (<12h Remaining)

Step 1: Calculate severity immediately
        → python scripts/breach_severity_calculator.py --dpc N --ei N \
          --confidentiality N --t0 "original-t0" --json

Step 2: If MEDIUM or higher, prepare phased notification
        → Art. 33(4) allows phased notification when full information unavailable
        → Initial notification: what is known + promise of update
        → Supplementary notification: full details when available

Step 3: File initial SA notification before deadline expires

Step 4: Initialize timeline for ongoing tracking
        → Continue gathering information for supplementary notification

Step 5: Document emergency timeline and decisions

Workflow 3: Processor Breach Notification

Step 1: Processor becomes aware of breach
        → T0 for processor = moment of awareness

Step 2: Processor must notify controller "without undue delay"
        → Check DPA for specific contractual deadline (24h/48h common)

Step 3: Controller's T0 starts when controller becomes aware
        → Controller's 72h clock starts at this point

Step 4: Controller assesses severity independently
        → python scripts/breach_severity_calculator.py (controller's assessment)

Step 5: Controller makes notification decisions
        → Processor provides information; controller decides on SA/subject notification

ENISA Severity Formula

SE = (DPC x EI) + CB
ComponentRangeDescription
DPC1-4Data Processing Context — nature and sensitivity of data
EI0.25-1.0Ease of Identification — how easily individuals can be identified
CB-0.5 to +1.0Circumstances of Breach — additive factors (malicious intent, volume, loss type)

Severity Verdicts

Score RangeVerdictNotification Obligations
<2LOWInternal log only. No SA or subject notification required
2 to <3MEDIUMNotify supervisory authority within 72h (Art. 33)
3 to <4HIGHNotify SA within 72h + notify individual data subjects (Art. 34)
>=4VERY HIGHNotify SA + data subjects + consider public notice; crisis management

Notification Decision Matrix

Quick reference for notification obligations per regulation and severity.

RegulationAuthority NotificationIndividual NotificationTrigger
GDPR Art. 33SA within 72hN/AUnless unlikely to result in risk to rights/freedoms
GDPR Art. 34N/AWithout undue delayWhen likely to result in high risk
CCPAState AGAffected consumersUnencrypted personal information compromised
HIPAAHHS within 60 daysAffected individualsUnsecured PHI; >500: notify media
PCI DSSCard brands within 24hCardholders (via issuer)Cardholder data compromised
NIS2 Art. 23CSIRT within 24h (early warning), 72h (notification)N/ASignificant incident
AI Act Art. 62Market surveillance within 15 daysN/ASerious incident involving AI system

Controller vs. Processor Obligations

ObligationControllerProcessor
Notify supervisory authorityYes (Art. 33)No (notify controller only)
Notify data subjectsYes (Art. 34)No
Document all breachesYes (Art. 33(5))Yes (assist controller)
Notify controllerN/AYes, without undue delay (Art. 33(2))
Conduct severity assessmentYesAssist (provide information)
Timeline starts (T0)When controller becomes awareWhen processor becomes aware

Troubleshooting

ProblemPossible CauseResolution
Severity score is borderline between MEDIUM and HIGHParameters are at threshold boundariesScore conservatively — if near 3.0, treat as HIGH and notify data subjects; document the borderline analysis
72-hour deadline approaching with incomplete informationComplex breach requiring ongoing investigationUse Art. 33(4) phased notification — notify SA with available information and supplement later
Processor discovered breach but delayed notifying controllerDPA contractual deadline may have been missedDocument the delay; assess whether processor's delay affected controller's ability to comply; review DPA terms
Cross-border breach — unclear which SA to notifyMulti-jurisdictional processing with unclear lead SANotify the SA of your main establishment (one-stop-shop); if unclear, notify the SA where most affected subjects reside
Breach involves encrypted data — unclear if notification neededEncryption may lower severity or eliminate notificationIf encryption was effective (strong algorithm, key not compromised), this may make notification unnecessary per Art. 34(3)(a); document the analysis
AI system involved in breach — unclear additional obligationsAI Act Art. 62 may apply alongside GDPRAssess whether AI system is high-risk under AI Act; if serious incident, notify market surveillance authority within 15 days in addition to GDPR obligations

Success Criteria

  • Breach severity calculated within 2 hours of awareness -- ENISA methodology applied with documented parameters and scoring rationale
  • SA notification filed within 72 hours of T0 -- for MEDIUM or higher severity breaches, phased notification used when full information unavailable
  • Data subject notification completed without undue delay -- for HIGH or higher severity breaches, clear communication of impact and protective measures
  • All response actions tracked with timestamps -- breach timeline maintained from T0 through closure with all events recorded
  • Cross-regulation obligations identified and met -- GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA, PCI DSS, NIS2, and AI Act obligations assessed and fulfilled per applicable law
  • Post-breach documentation complete -- internal breach log maintained per Art. 33(5) regardless of notification decision

Scope & Limitations

In Scope:

  • ENISA breach severity calculation with full parameter support
  • GDPR Art. 33/34 notification timeline tracking
  • Multi-regulation notification obligation assessment (GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA, PCI DSS, NIS2, AI Act)
  • Controller vs. processor obligation guidance
  • Cross-border breach notification routing
  • Phased notification guidance per Art. 33(4)
  • Breach response event tracking and deadline monitoring

Out of Scope:

  • Technical incident containment (network isolation, forensics, malware removal)
  • Filing notifications with supervisory authorities (document preparation only)
  • Insurance claim processing or coverage analysis
  • Law enforcement coordination
  • Public relations or crisis communications strategy
  • Forensic investigation methodology

Anti-Patterns

  • Delaying T0 determination to buy more time -- T0 is the moment the controller becomes "aware" of the breach, not when full details are known; deliberately delaying awareness to extend the 72-hour window is a compliance violation and will be treated as such by regulators
  • Defaulting to no notification without documented analysis -- every breach must be documented and assessed, even if the conclusion is that notification is not required; "we decided not to notify" without documented severity analysis is indefensible
  • Treating processor notification as controller notification -- processor notifying its own SA does not satisfy the controller's Art. 33 obligation; the controller must make its own independent notification decision and filing
  • Using encryption as an automatic notification exemption -- Art. 34(3)(a) exemption requires that the encrypted data was rendered unintelligible AND the encryption key was not compromised; weak encryption or compromised keys do not qualify
  • Ignoring AI Act obligations for AI-involved breaches -- if the breach involves a high-risk AI system, Art. 62 serious incident reporting (15 days to market surveillance authority) applies in addition to GDPR; these are separate obligations with different timelines

Tool Reference

breach_severity_calculator.py

Calculates ENISA breach severity score and determines notification obligations.

FlagRequiredDescription
--dpc <1-4>YesData Processing Context: 1=Simple demographic, 2=Behavioral/financial, 3=Sensitive personal, 4=Special category/highly sensitive
--ei <0.25-1.0>YesEase of Identification: 0.25=Negligible, 0.5=Limited, 0.75=Significant, 1.0=Maximum
--confidentiality <0/0.25/0.5>NoConfidentiality loss score (default 0)
--integrity <0/0.25/0.5>NoIntegrity loss score (default 0)
--availability <0/0.25/0.5>NoAvailability loss score (default 0)
--maliciousNoFlag for malicious intent (adds +0.5 to CB)
--t0 <ISO datetime>NoT0 timestamp for deadline calculation
--templateNoGenerate input template
--jsonNoOutput in JSON format

breach_timeline_tracker.py

Tracks breach response timeline, events, and regulatory deadlines.

SubcommandDescription
initInitialize breach timeline (--breach-id, --t0, --description required, --output optional)
eventRecord event (--timeline, --action, --category required)
statusView status dashboard (--timeline required, --json optional)
deadlinesCheck deadline status (--timeline required, --json optional)

平台分布

Codex

36.14%
按下载量换算53

Claude

29.06%
按下载量换算43

Cursor

16.89%
按下载量换算25

Gemini CLI

8.37%
按下载量换算12

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

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。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