Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 开发

risk-assessment-methodology(风险评估方法)

risk-assessment-methodology 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。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。

risk-assessment-methodology 是开发类 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,按安装量在开发类的 21,746 个 Skill 里排第 20,060。

总安装 242周安装 10GitHub Stars 219下载 79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:risk-assessment-methodology(风险评估方法)
来源仓库:https://github.com/hack23/cia
仓库路径:skills/risk-assessment-methodology
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/hack23/cia --skill risk-assessment-methodology
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/hack23/cia --skill risk-assessment-methodology

这个 Skill 是做什么的

开发类 Skill 面向写代码、改代码和排查问题,一般会读写仓库文件,部分还会执行构建或测试命令。

用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息。适合围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理。可结合来源仓库和安装命令核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围及是否会触发联网或文件读写。

risk-assessment-methodology 属于开发类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/risk-assessment-methodology

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/hack23/cia --skill risk-assessment-methodology;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

risk-assessment-methodology 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/hack23/cia --skill risk-assessment-methodology。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

risk-assessment-methodology 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。

risk-assessment-methodology 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。

risk-assessment-methodology 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。

risk-assessment-methodology 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 242 次,近一周安装 10 次,下载 79 次,GitHub 219 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。

risk-assessment-methodology 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。
  • 需要处理开发类任务、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。

开发类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
skill-vetter

技能审查员 · OpenClaw

8,779,018986操作浏览器MIT-0通过
ontology

本体论 · OpenClaw

6,636,960576只读MIT-0通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

6,631,872764接触敏感数据未明确通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

3,757,680201接触敏感数据未明确通过
nano-banana-pro

纳米香蕉专业版 · OpenClaw

3,526,898364接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒
risk-assessment-methodology

风险评估方法 · 本页

242219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

Risk Assessment Methodology Skill

Purpose

This skill provides quantitative risk assessment methodology aligned with Hack23 AB's enterprise risk management framework. It enables security professionals and business leaders to systematically identify, analyze, evaluate, and treat risks using defensible statistical methods that demonstrate cybersecurity consulting expertise through measurable, data-driven risk quantification.

When to Use This Skill

Apply this skill when:

  • ✅ Conducting quarterly risk assessments
  • ✅ Evaluating risks for new products or services
  • ✅ Calculating Annual Loss Expectancy (ALE) for control investments
  • ✅ Prioritizing risk treatment based on quantitative impact
  • ✅ Documenting risk acceptance decisions
  • ✅ Creating risk registers for compliance frameworks
  • ✅ Performing threat modeling with financial impact
  • ✅ Supporting business case for security controls
  • ✅ Responding to client risk assessment inquiries

Do NOT use for:

  • ❌ Real-time incident response (use incident-response skill)
  • ❌ Vulnerability scoring (use vulnerability-management skill)
  • ❌ Code security reviews (use secure-code-review skill)

Risk Assessment Process Flow

flowchart TD
    START[🎯 Risk Assessment<br/>Initiation] --> IDENTIFY[📋 Risk Identification<br/>Assets • Threats • Vulnerabilities]

    IDENTIFY --> ANALYZE[🔍 Risk Analysis]

    ANALYZE --> LIKELIHOOD[📊 Likelihood Assessment<br/>Historical + Industry + Expert]
    ANALYZE --> IMPACT[💰 Impact Assessment<br/>Financial • Operational • Reputational]

    LIKELIHOOD --> CALC[🔢 Risk Score Calculation<br/>Probability × Impact × 100]
    IMPACT --> CALC

    CALC --> CATEGORY{Risk Level?}

    CATEGORY -->|400-600| CRITICAL[🔴 Critical Risk<br/>Immediate action required]
    CATEGORY -->|200-399| HIGH[🟠 High Risk<br/>Priority mitigation needed]
    CATEGORY -->|100-199| MEDIUM[🟡 Medium Risk<br/>Planned controls required]
    CATEGORY -->|50-99| LOW[🟢 Low Risk<br/>Monitor and accept]
    CATEGORY -->|1-49| MINIMAL[⚪ Minimal Risk<br/>Accept risk]

    CRITICAL --> TREAT{Treatment<br/>Decision}
    HIGH --> TREAT
    MEDIUM --> TREAT
    LOW --> ACCEPT[✅ Accept Risk<br/>Document in Risk Register]
    MINIMAL --> ACCEPT

    TREAT -->|Reduce| MITIGATE[🛡️ Implement Controls<br/>Reduce likelihood or impact]
    TREAT -->|Transfer| TRANSFER[🤝 Insurance/Outsource<br/>Share financial burden]
    TREAT -->|Avoid| AVOID[🚫 Eliminate Activity<br/>Remove risk source]
    TREAT -->|Accept| ACCEPT_HIGH[📋 Document Acceptance<br/>CEO approval required]

    MITIGATE --> RESIDUAL[📉 Residual Risk<br/>Reassessment]
    TRANSFER --> RESIDUAL
    AVOID --> RESIDUAL
    ACCEPT_HIGH --> RESIDUAL
    ACCEPT --> REGISTER[📊 Risk Register<br/>Tracking & Monitoring]

    RESIDUAL --> REGISTER

    REGISTER --> REVIEW[🔄 Periodic Review<br/>Quarterly/Annual]
    REVIEW --> START

    style START fill:#1565C0,stroke:#0D47A1,stroke-width:3px,color:#fff
    style CRITICAL fill:#D32F2F,stroke:#B71C1C,stroke-width:3px,color:#fff
    style HIGH fill:#FF9800,stroke:#F57C00,stroke-width:2px
    style MEDIUM fill:#FFC107,stroke:#FFA000,stroke-width:2px
    style LOW fill:#4CAF50,stroke:#2E7D32,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
    style MINIMAL fill:#9E9E9E,stroke:#616161,stroke-width:1px
    style REGISTER fill:#9C27B0,stroke:#7B1FA2,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff

Likelihood Assessment Framework

Evaluate probability using descriptive categories with quantitative ranges:

LikelihoodBadgeProbabilityAnnual FrequencyARODefinitionExamples
Almost CertainAlmost Certain80-99%292-361 events/year0.8-0.99Expected to occur in most circumstancesDaily operational issues, routine maintenance
LikelyLikely60-79%219-291 events/year0.6-0.79Will probably occurWeekly service disruptions, staff availability issues
PossiblePossible40-59%146-218 events/year0.4-0.59Might occur at some timeMonthly supplier issues, seasonal variations
UnlikelyUnlikely20-39%73-145 events/year0.2-0.39Could occur but not expectedQuarterly security incidents, annual contract changes
RareRare5-19%18-72 events/year0.05-0.19May occur only in exceptional circumstancesMulti-year events, rare external factors
ExceptionalExceptional<5%<18 events/year<0.05Rare, once-in-decade eventBlack swan events, extreme scenarios

Likelihood Assessment Methods

Quantitative Data (Preferred):

# Historical frequency analysis
def calculate_aro(events_last_3_years, trend_factor=1.0):
    """Calculate Annual Rate of Occurrence from historical data"""
    base_aro = sum(events_last_3_years) / 3
    adjusted_aro = base_aro * trend_factor
    return min(adjusted_aro, 0.99)  # Cap at 99%

# Example: 8 incidents in 3 years, increasing trend
aro = calculate_aro([2, 3, 3], trend_factor=1.2)  # = 0.32 (Unlikely)

Qualitative Assessment (When Data Limited):

  • Industry benchmarks (DBIR, ENISA Threat Landscape)
  • Expert judgment from security team
  • Peer comparison with similar organizations
  • Threat intelligence feeds

Impact Assessment Framework

Evaluate business impact across multiple dimensions:

ImpactBadgeFinancialOperationalReputationalRegulatory
CatastrophicCatastrophic>€50KComplete shutdownInternational mediaCriminal charges
CriticalCritical€10K-50KMajor disruptionNational mediaSignificant fines
HighHigh€1K-10KSignificant degradationIndustry attentionModerate penalties
ModerateModerate€500-1KPartial service impactRegional visibilityMinor warnings
LowLow€100-500Minor inconvenienceLimited local impactVerbal guidance
MinimalMinimal<€100No significant impactNo external visibilityNo implications

Impact Score Mapping

  • Catastrophic = 6
  • Critical = 5
  • High = 4
  • Moderate = 3
  • Low = 2
  • Minimal = 1

Risk Score Calculation

Formula: Risk Score = Likelihood (midpoint %) × Impact Score (1-6) × 100

Calculation Examples

Example 1: Data Breach Risk

  • Likelihood: Unlikely (30% midpoint)
  • Impact: Critical (5)
  • Risk Score: 0.30 × 5 × 100 = 150 → 🟡 Medium Risk

Example 2: DDoS Attack Risk

  • Likelihood: Possible (50% midpoint)
  • Impact: High (4)
  • Risk Score: 0.50 × 4 × 100 = 200 → 🟠 High Risk

Example 3: Ransomware Risk

  • Likelihood: Likely (70% midpoint)
  • Impact: Catastrophic (6)
  • Risk Score: 0.70 × 6 × 100 = 420 → 🔴 Critical Risk

Risk Level Categories

Risk LevelScore RangeBadgeManagement ResponseReview Frequency
Critical400-600CriticalCEO immediate action, daily monitoringDaily
High200-399HighWeekly executive reviewWeekly
Medium100-199MediumMonthly assessmentMonthly
Low50-99LowQuarterly monitoringQuarterly
Minimal1-49MinimalAcceptance, periodic reviewAnnual

Financial Risk Analysis

Single Loss Expectancy (SLE)

Formula: SLE = Asset Value × Exposure Factor

Asset Value Categories:

CategoryValue RangeExamples
Mission Critical€100K-500KCore infrastructure, customer data
High Value€50K-100KBusiness applications, intellectual property
Standard€10K-50KSupporting systems, processes
Low Value€1K-10KDocumentation, utilities

Exposure Factor Guidelines:

ExposureFactorDescription
Complete Loss0.8-1.0Total destruction (ransomware, theft)
Major Loss0.5-0.8Significant damage (data corruption)
Moderate Loss0.2-0.5Partial damage (service disruption)
Minor Loss0.1-0.2Limited impact (performance degradation)

Annual Loss Expectancy (ALE)

Formula: ALE = SLE × ARO

Example Calculation:

# Ransomware attack on CIA Platform
asset_value = 200000  # €200K (Mission Critical)
exposure_factor = 0.9  # 90% loss (Complete Loss)
aro = 0.7  # 70% (Likely based on industry data)

sle = asset_value * exposure_factor  # €180K
ale = sle * aro  # €126K annually

Value at Risk (VaR) Framework

Formula: VaR = Impact (€) × Probability × Confidence Factor × Time Horizon

VaR Risk Categories:

CategoryVaR Range (€)Management Action
Critical>€200KBoard escalation, immediate mitigation
High€50K-200KExecutive committee, quarterly review
Medium€10K-50KRisk committee, semi-annual review
Low€1K-10KManagement monitoring, annual review
Minimal<€1KAcceptance, periodic review

Risk Treatment Decision Matrix

graph TB
    RISK[📊 Risk Identified<br/>with Score] --> EVAL{Risk Level?}

    EVAL -->|Critical/High<br/>400-600, 200-399| HIGH_TREAT[🎯 Treatment Required]
    EVAL -->|Medium<br/>100-199| MED_TREAT[⚖️ Treatment Evaluation]
    EVAL -->|Low/Minimal<br/>1-99| LOW_TREAT[✅ Consider Acceptance]

    HIGH_TREAT --> OPTIONS1[Treatment Options]
    MED_TREAT --> OPTIONS2[Treatment Options]
    LOW_TREAT --> ACCEPT_DIRECT[Accept Risk<br/>Document in Risk Register]

    OPTIONS1 --> MITIGATE1[🛡️ Mitigate<br/>Implement controls]
    OPTIONS1 --> TRANSFER1[🤝 Transfer<br/>Insurance/Outsource]
    OPTIONS1 --> AVOID1[🚫 Avoid<br/>Eliminate activity]

    OPTIONS2 --> MITIGATE2[🛡️ Mitigate<br/>Cost-benefit analysis]
    OPTIONS2 --> ACCEPT2[📋 Accept<br/>Document rationale]

    MITIGATE1 --> COST_BENEFIT{Control Cost<br/>vs ALE?}
    TRANSFER1 --> COST_BENEFIT
    MITIGATE2 --> COST_BENEFIT

    COST_BENEFIT -->|Control < ALE| IMPLEMENT[✅ Implement Control]
    COST_BENEFIT -->|Control > ALE| ACCEPT_COST[📋 Accept Risk<br/>Document decision]

    AVOID1 --> BUSINESS{Business<br/>Impact?}
    BUSINESS -->|Acceptable| ELIMINATE[🚫 Eliminate Risk]
    BUSINESS -->|Unacceptable| FIND_ALT[🔄 Find Alternative]

    IMPLEMENT --> RESIDUAL[📉 Residual Risk<br/>Assessment]
    ACCEPT2 --> REGISTER[📊 Risk Register]
    ACCEPT_COST --> REGISTER
    ACCEPT_DIRECT --> REGISTER
    ELIMINATE --> REGISTER

    RESIDUAL --> REEVAL{Still<br/>High/Critical?}
    REEVAL -->|Yes| ADDITIONAL[Additional Controls<br/>Required]
    REEVAL -->|No| REGISTER

    ADDITIONAL --> COST_BENEFIT

    style RISK fill:#1565C0,stroke:#0D47A1,stroke-width:3px,color:#fff
    style HIGH_TREAT fill:#D32F2F,stroke:#B71C1C,stroke-width:3px,color:#fff
    style MED_TREAT fill:#FF9800,stroke:#F57C00,stroke-width:2px
    style IMPLEMENT fill:#4CAF50,stroke:#2E7D32,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
    style REGISTER fill:#9C27B0,stroke:#7B1FA2,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff

Cost-Benefit Analysis Formula

Control Value = ALE (Before) - ALE (After) - Control Cost

def control_roi(ale_before, ale_after, control_cost_annual):
    """Calculate return on investment for security control"""
    annual_benefit = ale_before - ale_after
    net_benefit = annual_benefit - control_cost_annual
    roi_percentage = (net_benefit / control_cost_annual) * 100
    return {
        'annual_benefit': annual_benefit,
        'net_benefit': net_benefit,
        'roi_percentage': roi_percentage,
        'recommendation': 'Implement' if net_benefit > 0 else 'Reject'
    }

# Example: MFA implementation
result = control_roi(
    ale_before=126000,  # €126K ransomware risk
    ale_after=12600,    # 90% reduction
    control_cost_annual=5000  # €5K/year for MFA
)
# Result: €108.4K net benefit, 2068% ROI → Implement

Risk Assessment Templates

Template 1: Comprehensive Risk Assessment

# Risk Assessment: [Risk Name]

**Risk ID:** RSK-2025-XXX
**Assessment Date:** 2025-01-XX
**Assessor:** [Name/Role]
**Status:** Open/Mitigated/Accepted/Closed

## Risk Description
Brief description of the risk scenario.

## Asset Information
- **Primary Asset:** [Asset name]
- **Asset Value:** €X
- **Classification:** [Confidentiality/Integrity/Availability levels]

## Threat & Vulnerability
- **Threat Actor:** [Who/what causes the risk]
- **Threat Motivation:** [Why would they exploit this]
- **Vulnerability:** [What weakness enables exploitation]
- **Attack Vector:** [How the attack occurs]

## Likelihood Assessment
- **Category:** [Exceptional/Rare/Unlikely/Possible/Likely/Almost Certain]
- **Probability:** X%
- **ARO:** X.XX
- **Evidence:** [Historical data, industry benchmarks, expert judgment]

## Impact Assessment
- **Financial:** €X (Category: [Minimal/Low/Moderate/High/Critical/Catastrophic])
- **Operational:** [Description]
- **Reputational:** [Description]
- **Regulatory:** [Description]
- **Impact Score:** X (1-6)

## Risk Calculation
- **Risk Score:** [Probability × Impact × 100] = XXX
- **Risk Level:** 🔴/🟠/🟡/🟢/⚪ [Critical/High/Medium/Low/Minimal]

## Financial Analysis
- **Asset Value:** €X
- **Exposure Factor:** X.X
- **SLE:** €X
- **ALE:** €X

## Current Controls
- [Existing control 1]
- [Existing control 2]

## Recommended Treatment
- **Strategy:** Mitigate/Transfer/Avoid/Accept
- **Proposed Controls:** [List controls]
- **Control Cost:** €X annually
- **Residual Risk Score:** XXX → [Risk Level]
- **Cost-Benefit:** Net benefit €X, ROI X%
- **Recommendation:** Implement/Reject

## Approval
- **Risk Owner:** [Name/Role]
- **Approval Date:** 2025-XX-XX
- **Review Date:** 2025-XX-XX

Template 2: Quick Risk Matrix

Risk IDDescriptionLikelihoodImpactScoreLevelTreatmentOwner
RSK-001Data breachUnlikely (30%)Critical (5)150🟡 MediumMFA implementationCTO
RSK-002DDoS attackPossible (50%)High (4)200🟠 HighCDN + WAFCTO
RSK-003RansomwareLikely (70%)Catastrophic (6)420🔴 CriticalBackup + EDRCEO

Integration with Classification Framework

Align risk assessments with Classification Framework:

CIA Triad Mapping

Confidentiality Impact:

  • Very High (C5) → Catastrophic financial impact
  • High (C4) → Critical financial impact
  • Moderate (C3) → High financial impact
  • Low (C2) → Moderate financial impact
  • Minimal (C1) → Low financial impact

Integrity Impact:

  • Critical (I5) → Catastrophic operational impact
  • High (I4) → Critical operational impact
  • Moderate (I3) → High operational impact
  • Low (I2) → Moderate operational impact
  • Minimal (I1) → Low operational impact

Availability Impact:

  • Mission Critical (A5) → Catastrophic business impact
  • High (A4) → Critical business impact
  • Moderate (A3) → High business impact
  • Low (A2) → Moderate business impact
  • Minimal (A1) → Low business impact

Practical Examples

Example 1: CIA Platform Ransomware Risk

Risk Assessment:

risk_id: "RSK-2025-001"
risk_name: "Ransomware attack on CIA Platform"
asset: "CIA Platform (Production)"
asset_value: 200000  # €200K

likelihood:
  category: "Likely"
  probability: 0.70
  aro: 0.70
  evidence: "Industry data (DBIR 2024), phishing susceptibility"

impact:
  financial: 180000  # €180K recovery costs
  operational: "72-hour downtime"
  reputational: "National media coverage"
  regulatory: "GDPR breach notification required"
  category: "Catastrophic"
  score: 6

risk_score: 420  # 0.70 × 6 × 100
risk_level: "Critical"

financial_analysis:
  sle: 180000  # €200K × 0.9
  ale: 126000  # €180K × 0.70

current_controls:
  - "Firewall"
  - "Antivirus"
  - "User awareness training"

proposed_treatment:
  strategy: "Mitigate"
  controls:
    - "Multi-factor authentication (MFA)"
    - "Endpoint detection and response (EDR)"
    - "Immutable backups (3-2-1 rule)"
    - "Email security gateway"
  control_cost_annual: 15000  # €15K
  residual_likelihood: 0.07  # 90% reduction
  residual_risk_score: 42  # 0.07 × 6 × 100
  residual_risk_level: "Minimal"

cost_benefit:
  ale_reduction: 113400  # €126K - €12.6K
  net_benefit: 98400  # €113.4K - €15K
  roi: 656  # 656% ROI
  recommendation: "IMPLEMENT IMMEDIATELY"

approval:
  risk_owner: "CEO"
  approval_date: "2025-01-25"
  next_review: "2025-04-25"

Example 2: Black Trigram No Authentication Risk

Risk Assessment:

risk_id: "RSK-2025-015"
risk_name: "No authentication system risk"
asset: "Black Trigram Gaming Platform"
asset_value: 10000  # €10K

likelihood:
  category: "Rare"
  probability: 0.12
  aro: 0.12
  evidence: "No user accounts, public content only"

impact:
  financial: 500  # €500 reputation recovery
  operational: "Minimal—frontend only"
  reputational: "Limited local impact"
  regulatory: "None—no personal data"
  category: "Low"
  score: 2

risk_score: 24  # 0.12 × 2 × 100
risk_level: "Minimal"

financial_analysis:
  sle: 5000  # €10K × 0.5 (moderate exposure)
  ale: 600  # €5K × 0.12

treatment:
  strategy: "Accept"
  rationale: "Low confidentiality classification. All content is public educational material. No user-specific operations."
  controls_considered:
    - "Authentication system: €8K/year"
    - "Cost-benefit: Negative ROI (€7.4K loss)"
  residual_risk: "Same as inherent risk"

risk_acceptance:
  documented_in: "Risk_Register.md"
  approved_by: "CEO"
  review_frequency: "Annual"
  trigger_conditions:
    - "Introduction of user accounts"
    - "Processing of personal data"
    - "User-generated content features"

Compliance Mapping

Risk Assessment ComponentISO 27005NIST RMFCIS Controls v8
Risk identificationClause 8.2Categorize4.1 Asset Management
Likelihood assessmentAnnex CAssess4.1 Risk Assessment
Impact assessmentAnnex CAssess4.2 Risk Analysis
Risk calculationClause 8.3Assess4.2 Risk Analysis
Risk treatmentClause 8.4Select + Implement4.3 Risk Response
Risk acceptanceClause 8.4.4Authorize4.4 Risk Approval
Monitoring & reviewClause 9Monitor4.5 Risk Monitoring

Standards & Policy References

Core Hack23 ISMS Policies:

All Hack23 ISMS Policies: https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC

平台分布

Codex

39.18%
按下载量换算31

Claude

27.33%
按下载量换算22

Cursor

16.92%
按下载量换算13

Gemini CLI

9.82%
按下载量换算8

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