2,786 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Detect abuse of legitimate Windows binaries (LOLBins) used for living off the land attacks. Monitors process creation, command-line arguments, and parent-child relationships to identify suspicious LOLBin execution patterns.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Plan, run, and measure an adversary engagement operation using the MITRE Engage framework so that deployed deception is driven by strategy instead of deployed ad hoc. Covers the Engage Matrix (Prepare, Expose, Affect, Elicit, Understand), the 10-Step Operational Process, mapping engagement Activities to the ATT&CK techniques they expose, and defining measurable Goals and Operational Objectives. Use when a team has honeypots, honeytokens, or canary tokens but no coordinating strategy, when leadership asks "should we engage attackers and how", when building a deception/denial program, when writing an adversary engagement operation plan, or when deciding which deception Activities to deploy against a specific threat actor. Keywords: MITRE Engage, adversary engagement, cyber deception strategy, denial and deception, Engage Matrix, EAC, EGO, Expose Affect Elicit, deception program, honeypot strategy, engagement operation.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
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.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Builds SOC performance metrics and KPI tracking dashboards measuring Mean Time to Detect (MTTD), Mean Time to Respond (MTTR), alert quality ratios, analyst productivity, and detection coverage using SIEM data. Use when SOC leadership needs operational visibility, continuous improvement tracking, or executive-level reporting on security operations effectiveness.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Builds real-time incident response dashboards in Splunk, Elastic, or Grafana to provide SOC analysts and leadership with situational awareness during active incidents, tracking affected systems, containment status, IOC spread, and response timeline. Use when IR teams need unified visibility during incident coordination and post-incident reporting.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Run Tamanu pre-release verification checks: verify that hotfixes on the current release branch are merged forward to main, and that hotfixes from prior release branches are included in the current release. Use when the user wants to run "pre-release checks", verify hotfix integrity before cutting or shipping a Tamanu release, confirm a release/X.YY branch is safe to release, or check that no hotfix has been orphaned (left on neither main nor the current release). Handles Tamanu's train-release model (release/X.YY branches vs vX.YY.Z patch tags) and the cherry-pick model where the same logical fix has different SHAs on different branches. Purely git-based — no live database or Canopy access needed. Not for deciding which tests to run (see scope-tamanu-release-tests).
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Correlate events across multiple log files from different sources, systems, or time periods. Build unified timelines, identify causal relationships between events, and highlight anomalies that span multiple data sources. Supports timezone normalization and gap detection. Use when analyzing logs from multiple systems (frontend, backend, database, infrastructure), investigating distributed system failures, or building event timelines across services. Triggers: "correlate these logs", "build timeline from multiple logs", "cross-system analysis", "find related events across logs", "multi-source log analysis", "distributed trace analysis"
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
This skill should be used when analyzing bug ticket data to identify quality trends, assess software quality status, and provide improvement recommendations. Use when a user provides bug lists (CSV, Excel, JSON, or Markdown format) and needs comprehensive quality analysis from a QA manager perspective. Generates statistical analysis, identifies quality hotspots, provides actionable recommendations, and produces professional Markdown reports suitable for project managers and executive leadership. Ideal for IT system development, migration, and implementation projects.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Professional contract review skill for business agreements including NDAs, MSAs, SLAs, SOWs, and software license agreements. Provides systematic clause-by-clause analysis, risk assessment with quantified scoring, red flag detection, and negotiation guidance. Use this skill when reviewing vendor contracts, partnership agreements, service agreements, or any business contract requiring risk evaluation and negotiation preparation. Triggers include "review this contract", "analyze this NDA", "check this agreement for risks", "prepare for contract negotiation", or when evaluating terms and conditions.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use this skill when creating executive-level briefing materials, board reports, management meeting presentations, or investor briefings. This skill provides the "So What? / Why Now? / What Next?" framework, data visualization guidelines optimized for executives, and professional templates for rapid document creation. Triggers include "create board report", "executive summary", "management meeting materials", "investor presentation", "one-page summary", or requests to communicate complex information to senior leadership.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Translate a fuzzy analytical question into a rigorous investigation plan. Interrogates the ask, grounds the plan in the available data dictionary, applies analytical best practices, and produces a structured brief of query specifications for a downstream query-writing skill. Plans, does not write SQL. Use when: "why did X drop", "is there a relationship between A and B", "who are our highest-value customers", "what's driving the change in Y", "investigate this trend", "design an analysis for", "scope this analytical question". (narrative-common)
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Post-launch review of a shipped PRD against the brief's success metrics. Did we move the metric? What did the data actually show? Which assumptions held, which broke? Which accepted-gap decisions resolved (confirmed vs. invalidated)? What would we do differently? Triggers on "outcome review", "did it work", "post-launch review", "did we move the metric", "retro the feature", "was it worth it". Produces a Confluence outcome-review page and updates the brief + linked decisions.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Work from a registered surface or transverse route by inspecting nodes, neighbors, edges, contracts, owners, tests, and gaps before editing.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Review framework vs host ownership for permissions, approvals, grants, native execution, storage, daemons, and Clawix integration.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Load when executing or resuming an approved plan from `dev/active/<task>/` or `.worktrees/<task>`, including phase commits, verification, PR creation, and handoff; not for plan authorship or review.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Validate App Store submission readiness, submit prepared versions, and monitor review status with current asc commands. Use when shipping or troubleshooting review submissions.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Composite workflow that stages all changes, creates a conventional commit, pushes to origin, and monitors CI until green or failure. Use when you want to commit and push in one step with CI monitoring. Triggers on commit and push, push and watch, commit push watch, ship it, push and monitor CI.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Knowledge base from NIST SP 800-37 Revision 2, the Risk Management Framework (RMF) for information systems and organizations. Use for the seven RMF steps (Prepare, Categorize, Select, Implement, Assess, Authorize, Monitor) and their tasks; the three-tier organization-wide risk model; authorization boundaries; the requirements-to-controls relationship; security categorization (FIPS 199/200 high-water mark) and control selection/tailoring (SP 800-53/53B baselines); assessment, the authorization decision and risk acceptance, continuous monitoring and ongoing authorization; the security/privacy distinction; and supply chain risk management. This is the security-and-privacy-risk-governance edge of systems engineering — it governs how much protection and whether to accept residual risk, complementing the disciplines that decide how protection is built. Does NOT reproduce the SP 800-53 control catalog or its baselines, the FIPS impact tables, or the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text; it names and routes to them rather than restating them.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Knowledge base from the NASA Systems Modeling Handbook for Systems Engineering (NASA-HDBK-1009A Rev A, 2025). Use for model-based systems engineering (MBSE) wired into NASA's NPR 7123.1 SE processes: the three aspects of MBSE (language / methodology / framework), the NASA SE Engine and its two OOSEM-derived steps (Model Planning, Setting Up the Model), the Modeling Plan as a SEMP subset, the tool-agnostic NASA SE metamodel of elements and relationships across the four SysML pillars (structure / behavior / requirements / parametrics), worked SysML diagrams and tables for stakeholders, requirements, structure and V&V, generating SE work products (ConOps, MOE, MOP, TPM, V&V), the MBSE Grid framework, alternative modeling approaches (PBR, Scenario, System Specification, Verification), and the ConOps model-content template. Scope is bounded to four common technical processes (Stakeholder Expectation Definition, Technical Requirements Definition, Product Verification, Product Validation). Does NOT teach SysML itself, mandate a tool, define NPR 7123.1 processes, cover technical-management processes 10-17, or reproduce the OMG SysML specification.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Knowledge base from the Expanded Guidance for NASA Systems Engineering (NASA/SP-2016-6105-SUPPL, Volume 1, March 2016) — the practitioner-depth supplement to the NASA SE Handbook. Use for the load-bearing mechanics the handbook compresses: the SE Engine's per-phase cadence and the iterative-vs-recursive distinction, the AS9100 crosswalk, life-cycle tailoring vs. customization and the Compliance Matrix, the recursive system-design consistency loop (ConOps vs. Operations Concept, requirement flow/type/ownership, successive refinement), product realization (verify/qualify/accept/certify cardinality, protoflight, 'test the way we fly' coverage, two-form transition), and the crosscutting technical-management procedures (six-step scheduling, cost-estimating method selection, JCL, interface document family, RIDM/CRM, CM baselines, EVM arithmetic, MOE/MOP/KPP/TPM, the three required leading indicators, and the decision-analysis method catalog). This is the DEPTH layer — it deliberately does NOT restate the base definitions; pair it with the nasa-se-handbook pack. Scope: NASA space-flight SE practice (Vol 1 Practices); thin on the Vol 2 process-appendix detail, on non-NASA/commercial life cycles, and on software-engineering methodology.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Knowledge base from the DoD Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Deskbook (Version 2022, OSD ManTech / Joint Service–Industry MRL Working Group). Use for assessing and managing manufacturing maturity and producibility risk in defense acquisition: the 10-level MRL scale and its non-linear, target-not-grade nature; the five demonstration environments (laboratory → production-relevant → production-representative → pilot line → production line); the nine manufacturing-risk threads and sub-threads; how MRL targets map onto Adaptive Acquisition Framework milestones (MRL 4/6/7/8/9); conducting an MRL Assessment; building a Manufacturing Maturation Plan; putting MRL maturity into contract language (Section L/M, SOW, AS6500A, DIDs); tailoring criteria for S&T, single-system, ship, sustainment, and industry contexts; and screening operational-technology cybersecurity. Manufacturing-readiness focused — it measures producibility risk and frames mitigation; it is NOT a technology-readiness (TRL) guide, a full systems-engineering process model, a cost-estimating or schedule guide, or a deep cybersecurity audit method (see sibling packs for those).
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Trabajo con genogramas: Reconocimiento y reflexión sobre los patrones de relaciones familiares. Perspectiva multigeneracional, símbolos del genograma, reconocimiento de patrones y recursos en la historia familiar.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
ジェノグラム（家族関係図）ワーク：家族の関係性パターンの把握とリフレクション。多世代的視点、ジェノグラム記号、パターン認識、家族史におけるリソース。
Работа с генограммой: Распознавание и осмысление паттернов семейных отношений. Межпоколенческая перспектива, символы генограммы, выявление паттернов и ресурсы в истории семьи.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。