4,556 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Audit AWS, Azure, and GCP environments against the CIS Foundations Benchmarks by running automated scans with tools like Prowler and ScoutSuite, interpreting failed controls, and tracking remediation for continuous compliance. Use when conducting a cloud security audit, validating CIS benchmark compliance (CIS v5 AWS, v4 Azure, v4 GCP), or setting up continuous cloud compliance monitoring.
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。
Parses API Gateway access logs (AWS API Gateway, Kong, Nginx) to detect BOLA/IDOR attacks, rate limit bypass, credential scanning, and injection attempts. Uses pandas for statistical analysis of request patterns and anomaly detection. Use when investigating API abuse or building API-specific threat detection rules.
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。
Parses Kubernetes API server audit logs (JSON lines) to detect exec-into-pod, secret access, RBAC modifications, privileged pod creation, and anonymous API access, and builds SIEM detection rules from the event patterns. Use when investigating a suspected cluster compromise, reconstructing what an attacker did through the API server, or writing Kubernetes-specific detection content. Keywords: audit policy, audit log, kube-apiserver, exec into pod, RBAC change, anonymous access, detection rules. Do not use for syscall-level detection inside a running container - use detecting-container-runtime-threats-with-falco. '
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。
Security-focused code review checklist for identifying vulnerabilities
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。
Information Security Management System (ISMS) audit expert for ISO 27001 compliance verification, security control assessment, and certification support. Use when the user mentions ISO 27001, ISMS audit, Annex A controls, Statement of Applicability (SOA), gap analysis, nonconformity management, internal audit, surveillance audit, or security certification preparation. Helps review control implementation evidence, document audit findings, classify nonconformities, generate risk-based audit plans, map controls to Annex A requirements, prepare Stage 1 and Stage 2 audit documentation, and support corrective action workflows.
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 for STRIDE threat modeling, DREAD risk scoring, data-flow-diagram threat analysis, or a quick secret scan — or when a security request needs routing to the right specialist skill (pen-testing, incident response, cloud posture, red team, AI security, threat hunting, secure code review). This skill owns threat modeling; everything else routes to a sibling.
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。
Flag only new security issues introduced by this diff. Reported in the Warden security summary.
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。
Remediates Google Cloud Security Command Center findings, including IAM permission fixes, cloud resource misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, and Toxic Combinations. Use when asked to fix, remediate, or mitigate a Security Command Center finding or address attack paths. Don't use for general IAM policy querying without a Security Command Center finding. For runtime threat detections, this skill provides containment and investigation guidance rather than automated configuration fixes.
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。
Queries and retrieves active security findings, external exposures, toxic combinations, vulnerabilities, threats, and sensitive data risks from Security Command Center on Google Cloud. Use when retrieving details for a security finding by its name, validating finding scope (e.g., verifying findingClass is TOXIC_COMBINATION, VULNERABILITY, EXTERNAL_EXPOSURE, or THREAT), or fetching finding details for triage. Don't use to draft remediations, apply patches, or execute configurations.
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。
Manages core GKE cluster provisioning, credentials, Autopilot vs Standard selection, and workload deployment. Use when creating GKE clusters, fetching kubectl credentials, or deciding between Autopilot and Standard modes. Don't use for Workload Identity (use gke-workload-identity), GKE networking (use gke-networking), security hardening (use gke-platform-security or gke-workload-security), or cluster upgrades (use gke-upgrades).
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。
Orchestrates comprehensive production readiness reviews and assessments for GKE clusters and workloads across scalability, security, reliability, observability, backup/DR, and cost optimization. Use when asked to productionize, prepare, assess, audit, or review a GKE cluster or workload before going live to production. Don't use for deep-dive single-domain implementation (use specific domain skills like gke-workload-scaling, gke-platform-security, gke-workload-security, gke-service-networking, gke-reliability instead).
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。
Fresh-session security questionnaire response for {{projectName}}. Parses a new inbound questionnaire from {{questionnaire_label}} in Gmail, matches each question to our vetted knowledge base of approved answers and policies, drafts responses in the vendor's own format (SIG, CAIQ, or a custom spreadsheet), flags anything it can't answer confidently, and posts the completed draft to {{security_channel}} — holding it for security to review before it goes back to the prospect.
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 implementing authentication/authorization, securing user input, or preventing OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities — including custom security implementations such as hashing passwords with bcrypt/argon2, sanitizing SQL queries with parameterized statements, configuring CORS/CSP headers, validating input with Zod, and setting up JWT tokens. Invoke for authentication, authorization, input validation, encryption, OWASP Top 10 prevention, secure session management, and security hardening. For pre-built OAuth/SSO integrations or standalone security audits, consider a more specialized skill.
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 security-focused full-stack web applications by implementing integrated frontend and backend components with layered security at every level. Covers the complete stack from database to UI, enforcing auth, input validation, output encoding, and parameterized queries across all layers. Use when implementing features across frontend and backend, building REST APIs with corresponding UI, connecting frontend components to backend endpoints, creating end-to-end data flows from database to UI, or implementing CRUD operations with UI forms. Distinct from frontend-only, backend-only, or API-only skills in that it simultaneously addresses all three perspectives—Frontend, Backend, and Security—within a single implementation workflow. Invoke for full-stack feature work, web app development, authenticated API routes with views, microservices, real-time features, monorepo architecture, or technology selection 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。
Analyzes code diffs and files to identify bugs, security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, insecure deserialization), code smells, N+1 queries, naming issues, and architectural concerns, then produces a structured review report with prioritized, actionable feedback. Use when reviewing pull requests, conducting code quality audits, identifying refactoring opportunities, or checking for security issues. Invoke for PR reviews, code quality checks, refactoring suggestions, review code, code quality. Complements specialized skills (security-reviewer, test-master) by providing broad-scope review across correctness, performance, maintainability, and test coverage in a single pass.
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。
Turn vulnerability notes, disclosure reports, PoCs, source code, or Codex Security findings into self-contained, sceptically validated, natural-sounding vulnerability reports. Use for one vulnerability or a disclosure campaign; a Codex Security scan is optional.
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 Codex is already in the finding-discovery phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to discover candidate security findings in a repository or code change. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.
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 Codex is already in the validation phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to determine whether one or more candidate security findings are valid. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.
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。
Track validated Codex Security findings in Linear, Jira, GitHub issues, or draft GitHub security advisories. Supports issue batches, duplicate checks, and reviewed writes. Do not use for scans or fixes.
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 a pull request, commit, branch diff, or working-tree patch for security vulnerabilities.
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。
Triage supplied or imported security findings against a repository using its security policy and static code evidence. Accepts scanner reports, advisories, GitHub findings, and Jira or Linear tickets. Do not use for discovery, duplicate triage, runtime validation, or fixes.
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 Codex is already in the attack-path-analysis phase of a security scan or the user explicitly asks to trace a security finding from source to sink and calibrate severity. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.
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 for a standard, single-pass security audit of an entire repository or a scoped path, package, folder, or submodule with no diff to review. This is the default repository scan. Do not use for PR, commit, branch, or working-tree diffs, or for deep, multi-pass scans.
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 only when the user explicitly requests verification that a security fix remediates a reported vulnerability. Do not invoke automatically while implementing fixes, reviewing ordinary code changes, or running tests. Do not use for non-security fixes, candidate finding validation, or full repository scans.
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。