본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

conducting-cyber-risk-assessment-with-nist-800-30

Assess cybersecurity risks using NIST SP 800-30 Rev 1 by examining threats, weaknesses, likelihood, and business impact. Produce a ranked risk register, a structured record of risks and recommended responses, with a summary for leadership.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

Conduct a defensible cybersecurity risk assessment using the NIST SP 800-30 Rev 1 methodology: prepare scope and a risk model, identify threat sources and threat events, identify vulnerabilities and predisposing conditions, determine likelihood and impact, compute risk, and communicate results as a prioritized risk register. Use when an organization needs an actual risk *assessment* (not a maturity score), when a control framework (CSF, ISO 27001, RMF, SOC 2, PCI) requires a documented risk analysis as input, when leadership asks "what are our top risks and how bad are they", when assessing risk for a new system or major change, or when building a risk register from scratch. This is the methodology that feeds framework selection, ATO packages, and treatment decisions. Keywords: risk assessment, NIST 800-30, threat modeling, likelihood and impact, risk register, risk analysis, threat sources, vulnerabilities, risk determination, qualitative risk, risk matrix, residual risk, risk treatment.

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Preparing documented risk analysis for compliance frameworks
  • Assessing a new system before launch
  • Reporting the highest risks to leadership
  • Updating an organization’s risk register

포함된 파일(5)

  • SKILL.md9.8 KB
  • assets/template.md4.9 KB
  • LICENSE11.0 KB
  • references/standards.md3.7 KB
  • scripts/process.py7.8 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Conducting a Cyber Risk Assessment with NIST SP 800-30

When to Use

  • When the organization needs a real risk assessment — an analysis of specific threats, likelihoods, and impacts — rather than a maturity score against a framework. (Maturity tells you how mature your practices are; a risk assessment tells you what could hurt you and how badly.)
  • When another framework requires a documented risk analysis as a mandatory input: NIST CSF (ID.RA), ISO 27001 (Clause 6.1.2), NIST RMF / 800-37 (the Prepare and Select steps), SOC 2 (CC3), PCI DSS, or HIPAA (§164.308(a)(1)(ii)(A)).
  • When standing up or significantly changing a system and you must understand its risk before authorization or go-live.
  • When leadership asks for the organization's top risks, ranked, with a rationale they can defend to a board or regulator.
  • When building or refreshing an enterprise risk register.

Prerequisites

  • An inventory of in-scope assets, systems, and the information types they handle (system boundary defined).
  • Access to threat intelligence (internal incident history, sector ISAC feeds, MITRE ATT&CK) to ground threat-event likelihood in observed behavior.
  • Vulnerability data (scan results, pen-test findings, configuration/architecture review) for the in-scope systems.
  • Business context: which missions/processes the systems support, and what impact to confidentiality, integrity, or availability would mean in business terms.
  • Agreement on the risk model and scales before scoring, so results are comparable and repeatable (see references/standards.md).
  • Familiarity with the three-tier risk-management context from NIST SP 800-39 (organization, mission/business process, information system).

Workflow

NIST SP 800-30 Rev 1 defines four steps. Steps 1 and 4 bookend the assessment; Step 2 is the analytic core.

1. Prepare for the assessment

Define and document:

  • Purpose (e.g., support an authorization decision, inform control selection, satisfy ISO 6.1.2).
  • Scope — organizational tier (Tier 1/2/3), systems, and time horizon.
  • Assumptions and constraints (e.g., assume an external adversarial threat with moderate capability).
  • Information sources — threat, vulnerability, and impact inputs.
  • Risk model and analytic approach — the factors (threat source, threat event, vulnerability, likelihood, impact) and the scales (qualitative Very Low–Very High, or semi-quantitative 0–10). Lock these now.

2. Conduct the assessment

Work through the analytic tasks in order. The 800-30 appendices provide the reference taxonomies (D–I).

2a. Identify threat sources (Appendix D). Classify by type: Adversarial (individuals, groups, nation-states — characterize capability, intent, targeting), Accidental (user error), Structural (equipment/software failure), Environmental (natural disasters, infrastructure outages).

2b. Identify threat events (Appendix E). The specific actions a source could take (e.g., "adversary exfiltrates credentials via phishing then moves laterally"). Map adversarial events to MITRE ATT&CK techniques for traceability.

2c. Identify vulnerabilities and predisposing conditions (Appendix F). Weaknesses (missing MFA, unpatched service) and conditions that make exploitation more or less likely (internet exposure, flat network, lack of segmentation).

2d. Determine likelihood (Appendix G). Assess the likelihood that a threat event is initiated (adversarial) or occurs (non-adversarial), and the likelihood it results in adverse impact given the vulnerabilities. Combine into an overall likelihood on the agreed scale.

2e. Determine impact (Appendix H). Magnitude of harm if the event succeeds — to operations, assets, individuals, other organizations, or the nation. Express against the agreed scale and in business terms.

2f. Determine risk (Appendix I). Risk is a function of likelihood and impact. Plot each threat event on the risk matrix (e.g., likelihood × impact → Very Low … Very High). Record the risk level, the contributing factors, and uncertainty/assumptions.

3. Communicate and share results

Produce the risk register and an executive briefing. For each risk: the threat event, affected assets, likelihood, impact, risk level, key contributing vulnerabilities, and a recommended treatment. Rank by risk level so decision-makers see the top risks first.

4. Maintain the assessment

Risk is not static. Define a refresh cadence and the triggers that force re-assessment (new system, major architecture change, significant incident, new threat intel). Track risk-acceptance decisions and treatment progress over time.

5. Drive treatment decisions

Hand the ranked register to risk owners. For each risk choose a treatment — mitigate (add/strengthen controls), transfer (insurance, contractual), avoid (stop the activity), or accept (document residual risk with an authorizing signature). Re-score residual risk after planned controls to show the post-treatment position.

Key Concepts

ConceptDefinition
Threat sourceThe cause of a threat event: adversarial, accidental, structural, or environmental.
Threat eventA specific action or occurrence that could cause harm (mapped to ATT&CK for adversarial cases).
VulnerabilityA weakness that a threat event can exploit.
Predisposing conditionA condition that increases or decreases the likelihood of adverse impact (e.g., internet exposure).
LikelihoodThe chance a threat event initiates/occurs and results in adverse impact.
ImpactThe magnitude of harm if the event succeeds.
RiskA function of likelihood and impact; the expected harm to the organization.
Inherent vs residual riskRisk before vs after planned/implemented controls.
Risk tolerance / appetiteThe level of risk leadership is willing to accept.
Risk registerThe prioritized record of risks, scores, owners, and treatments.

Tools & Systems

  • NIST SP 800-30 Rev 1 — the methodology and Appendices D–I taxonomies (threat sources, events, vulnerabilities, likelihood, impact, risk).
  • NIST SP 800-39 — enterprise risk-management context (three tiers).
  • MITRE ATT&CK — to enumerate and ground adversarial threat events in observed TTPs.
  • Vulnerability scanners / pen-test reports — empirical vulnerability input.
  • Threat intel sources — sector ISACs, vendor feeds, internal incident history for likelihood grounding.
  • GRC / risk-register tooling — spreadsheet, or platforms such as ServiceNow GRC, Archer, OneTrust, to store and track the register.
  • FAIR (optional) — a quantitative model if leadership wants risk expressed in dollar ranges rather than qualitative bands.

Common Scenarios

  • CSF/ISO/SOC 2 needs a risk analysis. Run 800-30 to produce the documented assessment those frameworks require as input, then map results to their control sets.
  • New system before go-live. Assess threat events against the system's architecture and feed the result into the authorization (RMF Select/Authorize) decision.
  • Board wants the top risks. Deliver a ranked register with impacts in business terms and clear treatment recommendations.
  • Post-incident. Re-assess the affected systems; the incident updates likelihood evidence and may surface new threat events.
  • Annual refresh. Re-score against current threat intel and control changes; show movement in residual risk year over year.

Output Format

Produce a Risk Assessment Report using assets/template.md, containing:

  1. Purpose, scope, and tier — what was assessed and why.
  2. Assumptions, constraints, and risk model — the factors and scales used (so results are reproducible).
  3. Threat sources — by type, with adversarial characterization.
  4. Threat events — each with affected assets and ATT&CK mapping where adversarial.
  5. Vulnerabilities and predisposing conditions — tied to threat events.
  6. Risk register — table: ID, threat event, asset, likelihood, impact, risk level, contributing vulnerabilities, recommended treatment, owner, residual risk.
  7. Top risks summary — ranked, in business terms, for leadership.
  8. Maintenance plan — refresh cadence and re-assessment triggers.

Use scripts/process.py to score the register from a risk-input JSON (likelihood × impact → risk level on a configurable matrix), rank risks, and emit the register table.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Assess exposure of Windows secrets protected by DPAPI, the operating system’s data protection service, during authorized security tests. Guide examination and decryption of saved credentials and browser data using available user sessions, credentials, or backup keys.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Assessing saved credential exposure in authorized tests
  • Examining collected DPAPI files offline
  • Reviewing protected browser and RDP credentials
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills3.5만2026년 8월 31일 업데이트

Assess Shadow Credentials account takeover during authorized Active Directory testing. Examine permissions that allow public key registration, validate authentication without a password reset, and document credential cleanup, detection opportunities, and access control changes needed for remediation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Assessing risky permissions identified in BloodHound
  • Validating account takeover without resetting a password
  • Generating directory change records during security exercises
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills3.5만2026년 8월 31일 업데이트

Prepare for CMMC Level 2, a cybersecurity certification for defense contractors. Define the systems handling controlled information, review security requirements, calculate the SPRS assessment score, and organize remediation plans and evidence into a readiness report.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Define the assessment scope for systems handling controlled information
  • Calculate an SPRS score and prioritize unmet security requirements
  • Prepare security plans, remediation milestones, and assessment evidence
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills3.5만2026년 8월 31일 업데이트

Create disk images for investigations using dd or dcfldd on Linux. The workflow covers write protection, bit-for-bit copying, hash checks to verify integrity, and documentation of the acquisition process.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Preserving a suspect drive before investigation
  • Creating evidence copies of USB devices or memory cards
  • Verifying that a disk image matches its source
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills3.5만2026년 8월 31일 업데이트

Review Active Directory permissions with ldap3, a Python library for directory queries. Identify excessive access granted to non-administrative accounts, explain potential privilege escalation paths, and produce a JSON report with affected objects and remediation recommendations.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Auditing excessive Active Directory permissions
  • Investigating privilege escalation paths from ordinary accounts
  • Reporting affected objects and permission remediation recommendations
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills3.5만2026년 8월 31일 업데이트

Inspect suspicious Android APK files without running them. Analyze permissions, app components, suspicious code patterns, and network indicators, then produce a JSON risk report to support malware triage and detection rule development.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Triage suspicious APK files without running them
  • Inspect dangerous permission combinations and suspicious API calls
  • Extract network indicators for malware detection rules
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills3.5만2026년 8월 31일 업데이트

mukul975의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고