「promise」の検索結果

Systematically collects, categorizes, and distributes indicators of compromise (IOCs) during and after security incidents to enable detection, blocking, and threat intelligence sharing. Covers network, host, email, and behavioral indicators using STIX/TAXII formats and threat intelligence platforms. Activates for requests involving IOC collection, indicator extraction, threat indicator sharing, compromise indicators, STIX export, or IOC enrichment.

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。

Parse Office 365 Unified Audit Logs via Microsoft Graph API to detect email forwarding rule creation, inbox delegation, suspicious OAuth app grants, and other indicators of account compromise.

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。

await 漏れ・floating promise・並行競合など、非同期処理の correctness バグを検出する。並列化の効率提案（SIMPLIFY Efficiency）や配線断点（e2e-wiring）ではなく、「await を忘れて結果・順序・エラー伝播が壊れる」実装バグに限定する

Executes authorized attack simulations against Active Directory environments to identify misconfigurations, weak credentials, dangerous privilege paths, and exploitable trust relationships that could lead to domain compromise. The tester uses BloodHound for attack path analysis, Mimikatz for credential extraction, and Impacket for protocol-level attacks including Kerberoasting, AS-REP Roasting, and delegation abuse. Activates for requests involving Active Directory pentest, AD attack simulation, domain compromise testing, or Kerberos attack assessment.

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。

Detect compromised O365 and Google Workspace email accounts by analyzing inbox rule creation, suspicious sign-in locations, mail forwarding rules, and unusual API access patterns via Microsoft Graph and audit logs.

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。

Detecting compromised cloud credentials across AWS, Azure, and GCP by analyzing anomalous API activity, impossible travel patterns, unauthorized resource provisioning, and credential abuse indicators using GuardDuty, Defender for Identity, and SCC Event Threat Detection.

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。

Systematically collects, categorizes, and distributes indicators of compromise (IOCs) during and after security incidents to enable detection, blocking, and threat intelligence sharing. Covers network, host, email, and behavioral indicators using STIX/TAXII formats and threat intelligence platforms. Activates for requests involving IOC collection, indicator extraction, threat indicator sharing, compromise indicators, STIX export, or IOC enrichment.

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。

Parse Office 365 Unified Audit Logs via Microsoft Graph API to detect email forwarding rule creation, inbox delegation, suspicious OAuth app grants, and other indicators of account compromise.

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。

Detects rootkit presence on compromised systems by identifying hidden processes, hooked system calls, modified kernel structures, and covert network connections using Volatility memory forensics, cross-view detection, and tools like GMER, rkhunter, chkrootkit, and RootkitRevealer. Use when standard tools (Task Manager, netstat, AV/EDR) show nothing abnormal but compromise is suspected.

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。

Detect malicious inbox/mail-flow forwarding rules that adversaries create to maintain persistent access to email communications for intelligence collection and business email compromise. Use when hunting for suspicious auto-forwarding, hidden mailbox rules, or T1114-style email collection persistence after a compromised account or BEC incident.

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。

Detect Business Email Compromise (BEC) fraud, where attackers impersonate executives or vendors to trick employees into wire transfers or data disclosure without malicious links, using email gateway rules, behavioral analytics, and financial process controls. Use when investigating a suspected executive/vendor impersonation email or building detection rules for social-engineering fund-transfer fraud.

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。

Deploy AI and NLP-powered detection systems to identify business email compromise attacks by analyzing writing style, behavioral patterns, and contextual anomalies that evade traditional rule-based filters.

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。

Respond to phishing incidents by analyzing reported emails, extracting indicators, sandboxing URLs/attachments, assessing credential compromise, quarantining malicious messages organization-wide, and remediating affected accounts. Use when investigating a reported phishing or credential-phishing email, a suspected spearphishing incident, or when a mailbox-wide purge and account remediation is needed.

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。

Investigate supply chain attack artifacts including trojanized software updates, compromised build pipelines, and sideloaded dependencies to identify intrusion vectors and scope of compromise.

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。

Analyzes indicators of compromise (IOCs) including IP addresses, domains, file hashes, URLs, and email artifacts to determine maliciousness confidence, campaign attribution, and blocking priority. Use when triaging IOCs from phishing emails, security alerts, or external threat feeds; enriching raw IOCs with multi-source intelligence; or making block/monitor/whitelist decisions. Activates for requests involving VirusTotal, AbuseIPDB, MalwareBazaar, MISP, or IOC enrichment pipelines.

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。

Examine Linux system artifacts (auth logs, cron/systemd persistence, shell history, SSH keys, and system configuration) to uncover evidence of compromise, detect rootkits or backdoors, and reconstruct user/attacker activity. Use when investigating a compromised Linux server or workstation, hunting for persistence mechanisms, or scoping a Linux-based breach during incident response.

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。

Defensive threat modeling and risk management for your own estate — map where sensitive data lives across your asset graph, run compromise scenarios (what a hacked asset exposes, its blast radius, how you'd respond), and maintain a persistent risk register with likelihood×impact scoring, owners, mitigations, and review cadence via a deterministic CLI. All real data stays in your private USER tree; this skill is code only. USE WHEN threat model, threat modeling, risk register, risk assessment, what if X got hacked, compromise scenario, blast radius, sensitive data map, where is our sensitive data, data classification, risk review, add a risk, accept a risk, security risk posture. NOT FOR active pentesting or exploitation (use an offensive-security skill), world-scale futures stress-testing of ideas (use WorldThreatModel), or executing incident response (use your incident-response runbooks — this skill plans 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。

Answer "what did we say, decide, or promise" from Granola meeting notes — narrow to the meetings that can hold the answer, read the notes before the transcript, and cite the meeting behind every claim. Use when the user asks what happened in a meeting, what a customer or teammate said, what was decided or promised, or refers to a call, sync, standup, or demo.

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 the user asks to "design our change narrative", "build the old-world-to-new-game story arc", or "frame the shift our category is undergoing"; produces a Raskin-style strategic narrative arc — old world → the undeniable shift → winners vs losers under the new rules → the promised land → proof the promised land is real — derived from the positioning truth set and the belief/objection map, feeding the TALE Architecture arc sub-item. Every proof beat is labeled Measured / User-provided / [needs source] and this skill never adjudicates a claim. Not for the message house hierarchy — use message-system-architect; not for the pitch deck narrative — use pitch-narrative-builder; not for claim substantiation — use offer-claims-registry. 变革叙事弧/旧世界/应许之地/战略叙事结构

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。

Audit a Python project's installed dependencies for known CVEs by wrapping pip-audit (PyPA's official vulnerability auditor) and emitting findings in the canonical penetration-tester schema. Detects vulnerable direct AND transitive packages, normalizes pip-audit's severity output via OSV severity bands, falls back to pip list --outdated when pip-audit isn't installed, and supports requirements.txt, pyproject.toml (PEP 621), Pipfile.lock, and poetry.lock as input sources. Use when: pre-merge gate on a Python project, post-incident sweep after a PyPI compromise (e.g. ctx, request-toolbelt typosquats, ultralytics 8.3.42 compromise), SOC2 evidence collection, or inheriting an unfamiliar Python codebase. Threshold: any HIGH or CRITICAL CVE in the resolved dependency tree. MODERATE / LOW reported informationally. Trigger with: "audit python deps", "pip vulnerability scan", "check pypi packages for CVEs", "pip-audit run".

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。

Decode a counteroffer after you resign — what the raise, promotion promise, or title bump really signals, the statistics-informed risks of staying, and a clear-eyed decision framework. Use when asked my company countered my resignation, should I accept a counteroffer, they offered me more to stay, or decode this retention offer. Produces a component-by-component decode with 🔴🟡🟢 severity, the questions that expose which promises are real, and the stay/go decision sheet.

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。

Decision protocol for making side-effectful agent tools idempotent — so when an LLM tool call is retried (timeout, framework resume, user re-run, model duplicate emit), the second call is a no-op instead of a double-send. The load-bearing premise: the LM cannot promise it'll call exactly once; the tool must promise the second call is safe. Framework-agnostic — applies to LangGraph node bodies that re-run on resume, MCP tools, OpenAI tool-calling retries, CrewAI delegated tool invocations, and direct HTTP wrappers. Search keywords: duplicate email sent, charged twice, exactly-once, idempotency key, tool called twice, retry side effect, double-send, at-least-once delivery.

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。

Guide rapid triage and initial response to security incidents following NIST SP 800-61 methodology. Use when the user mentions 'incident response,' 'security incident,' 'triage,' 'we've been hacked,' 'breach,' 'compromised,' 'malware detected,' 'suspicious activity,' 'IOC,' 'indicators of compromise,' or needs help handling a security event.

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。

The systematic discipline of reviewing AI-generated and human-written marketing content for quality, accuracy, consistency, and effectiveness. This isn't proofreading—it's strategic quality control that catches issues before they damage brand, waste spend, or miss opportunities. In an era where AI can generate content at scale, QA becomes the bottleneck— and the moat. Speed without quality is just fast failure. Every piece of content is a brand promise, and QA ensures that promise is kept. Content QA operates at multiple levels: tactical (spelling, grammar), strategic (message alignment), technical (platform compliance), and brand (voice, tone). The best QA catches what the creator couldn't see because they were too close. Use when "review content, QA, quality check, proofread, check copy, content review, brand compliance, verify content, fact check, review before publish, content approval, final review, qa, content-review, quality-assurance, brand-compliance, proofreading, content-quality, review" mentioned.

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。