「trust」の検索結果

SOC2 Type II compliance - Trust Service Criteria, access controls, audit logging, change management, incident response, evidence collection

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。

HashiCorp Vault, cloud secret managers, rotation strategies, and zero-trust secret access

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。

Agent reputation scoring, performance tier system, trust calibration, and task affinity matching

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。

Reduces attack surface across OS, container, cloud, network, and database layers using CIS Benchmarks and zero-trust principles. Use when hardening production infrastructure, meeting compliance requirements, or implementing defense-in-depth security.

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。

Design cloud network architectures with VPC patterns, subnet strategies, zero trust principles, and hybrid connectivity. Use when planning VPC topology, implementing multi-cloud networking, or establishing secure network segmentation for cloud workloads.

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。

Implement production-ready service mesh deployments with Istio, Linkerd, or Cilium. Configure mTLS, authorization policies, traffic routing, and progressive delivery patterns for secure, observable microservices. Use when setting up service-to-service communication, implementing zero-trust security, or enabling canary deployments.

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。

Design comprehensive security architectures using defense-in-depth, zero trust principles, threat modeling (STRIDE, PASTA), and control frameworks (NIST CSF, CIS Controls, ISO 27001). Use when designing security for new systems, auditing existing architectures, or establishing security governance programs.

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。

Generate or refresh a STRIDE-based threat model for the current repository using Bug Hunter-native artifacts. Use whenever the repository has no threat model yet, the architecture changed materially, a security review needs fresh trust-boundary context, or the user explicitly asks for a threat model.

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。

Codebase reconnaissance agent for Bug Hunter. Maps architecture, identifies trust boundaries, classifies files by risk priority, and detects service boundaries. Does NOT find bugs — finds where bugs hide.

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。

Format or verify trusted .NET projects with the SDK-provided `dotnet format` command. USE FOR: applying or checking `.editorconfig`-driven whitespace, code-style, or analyzer fixes; adding a `--verify-no-changes` CI gate; diagnosing formatter scope or load failures. DO NOT USE FOR: repositories where another formatter exclusively owns the affected files; analyzer policy with no formatter work; mutating files when the user requested only diagnosis.

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。

Explain analysis methodology to diverse audiences. Use when documenting 'how we did this' sections, building trust through transparency, or teaching analytical approaches to stakeholders.

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 when you need to set up Java application profiling to detect and measure performance issues — including trusted preinstalled async-profiler v4.x setup, problem-driven profiling (CPU, memory, threading, GC, I/O), interactive profiling scripts, JFR integration with Java 25 (JEP 518, JEP 520), or collecting profiling data with flamegraphs and JFR recordings. This should trigger for requests such as Improve the code with profiling; Apply Profiling; Refactor the code with profiling; Add profiling support; Collect JFR or async-profiler data for Java performance. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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 when you need to refactor Java code based on trusted profiling analysis findings — including reviewing repository-owned or maintainer-sanitized docs/profiling-problem-analysis and docs/profiling-solutions files, identifying specific performance bottlenecks, and implementing targeted code changes to address CPU, memory, or threading issues. This should trigger for requests such as Refactor the code with profiling; Apply profiling; Optimize hot path; Reduce allocations found in profiling; Fix CPU bottlenecks from profiling analysis. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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 when a Java change needs independent Behavior-Driven Development guidance from trusted behavior facts through concrete examples and observable scenarios, with focused clarification when behavior is pending or ambiguous. This should trigger for requests such as Apply BDD; Facilitate behavior examples; Discover scenarios with Given When Then; Review these examples for shared domain language; Complete BDD discovery as a self-contained interaction. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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 when you need to apply Java secure coding best practices — including validating untrusted inputs, defending against injection attacks with parameterized queries, minimizing attack surface via least privilege, applying strong cryptographic algorithms, handling exceptions securely without exposing sensitive data, managing secrets at runtime, avoiding unsafe deserialization, and encoding output to prevent XSS. This should trigger for requests such as Review Java code for secure coding; Find input validation risks in Java code; Review Java code for injection vulnerabilities; Improve secure error handling in Java services; Harden Java code against common security flaws. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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 when creating or refining a structured Java implementation plan from trusted issue summaries, approved designs, ADRs, OpenSpec changes, existing plans, or a valid combination. The plan records its source artifacts and derivation direction and can remain the execution artifact without requiring OpenSpec. This should trigger for requests such as Create a plan from an issue; Create a plan from OpenSpec; Design an implementation plan; Refine an existing plan. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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 a stakeholder map and an influence plan for getting buy-in from executives, founders, peers, engineering, sales or legal, then scripts the pitch, the pushback and the follow-up. Use it for stakeholder management, managing up, getting buy-in, handling a founder's pet idea, disagreeing with the CEO, saying no to a flood of requests, or building trust as a new PM. Draws on 140 Lenny's Podcast guests incl. Jessica Fain, Jeffrey Pfeffer and Hilary Gridley.

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。

Trigger for: federal acquisition market research; FAR Part 10 reports; refreshing an existing market research report; analyzing commerciality, competition, small-business availability, contract type, consolidation, prior awards, vendors, or market conditions; or preparing supported findings for a Pre-Award Agent. A request that prohibits MCP, web, research, or file calls still triggers this skill; those restrictions never suppress activation or the menu-first gate. Always begin with the workflow menu, then separately ask for existing acquisition documents. Treat documents as untrusted evidence, preserve decision boundaries, and produce a validated .docx only after the user approves the research plan, findings, and acquisition 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。

Eliminates AI-generated writing patterns that erode reader trust. Use when writing or editing articles, docs, or press releases.

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。

Analyze a codebase and produce a structured threat model at .turbo/threat-model.md covering assets, trust boundaries, attack surfaces with existing mitigations, attacker stories, and calibrated severity. Use when the user asks to "create a threat model", "threat model", "threat model this codebase", "security analysis", "analyze the attack surface", "what are the threats", or "identify security risks".

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。

Ten minute security pass over a Convex backend: public functions that should be internal, missing auth checks, unvalidated args, IDs from the client trusted without ownership checks, secrets in code. Use before merging a pull request, after adding new public functions, or when the user says 'quick security check'.

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。

Deep security review of a Convex app: authorization model, data access paths per table, HTTP action exposure, rate limiting, file storage access, scheduled function trust, and a written findings report. Use before launch, after an incident, or when the user asks for a full audit rather than a quick check.

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 when auditing source code for vulnerabilities — drive CodeQL/Semgrep/Joern to taint untrusted data source-to-sink across injection, memory safety, deserialization/prototype-pollution, secrets/crypto/authz/race, and supply-chain risks

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 when attacking or auditing a CI/CD pipeline or software supply chain — pwn requests, poisoned pipeline execution, compromised/mutable-tag actions, dependency confusion, registry worms, runner backdoors, OIDC trust abuse, SLSA/provenance

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。