2,050 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Mint a tamper-evident, post-quantum-signed receipt for a consequential agent action (deploy, delete, pay, grant-access, model decision) so it can be verified later from the certificate alone.
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 Living Off the Land Binaries (LOLBins/LOLBAS) abuse including certutil, regsvr32, mshta, and rundll32 via process telemetry, Sigma rules, and parent-child process 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。
Conducts external reconnaissance using Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) techniques to map an organization's external attack surface without directly interacting with target systems. The tester gathers information from public sources including DNS records, certificate transparency logs, search engines, social media, code repositories, and data breach databases to build a comprehensive target profile. Activates for requests involving OSINT reconnaissance, external footprinting, attack surface mapping, or passive information gathering.
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。
Simulates man-in-the-middle attacks using Ettercap, mitmproxy, and Bettercap in authorized environments to intercept, analyze, and modify network traffic for testing encryption enforcement, certificate validation, and detection capabilities.
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。
Build an automated system to track adversary infrastructure using passive DNS, certificate transparency, WHOIS data, and IP enrichment to map and monitor threat actor command-and-control networks.
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 comprehensive identity governance and lifecycle management processes including joiner-mover-leaver automation, role mining, access request workflows, periodic recertification, and orphaned account remediation using IGA platforms. Activates for requests involving identity lifecycle management, JML processes, role-based access provisioning, or identity governance program design.
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。
Designs and documents structured incident response playbooks that define step-by-step procedures for specific incident types aligned with NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks. Covers playbook structure, decision trees, escalation criteria, RACI matrices, and integration with SOAR platforms. Activates for requests involving IR playbook creation, incident response procedure documentation, response runbook development, or SOAR playbook design.
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。
Prepare a defense-contractor environment for CMMC Level 2 certification: scope CUI and FCI, implement the 110 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families, compute the SPRS score with the DoD Assessment Methodology, manage a compliant POA&M, and ready the organization for a C3PAO assessment. Use when an organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract, when a contract carries DFARS clause 252.204-7012/7019/7020/7021, when preparing for or responding to a CMMC assessment, when computing or improving an SPRS score, when building a System Security Plan or POA&M for 800-171, or when scoping which systems are in the CUI boundary. Keywords: CMMC, CMMC Level 2, NIST 800-171, SP 800-171 Rev 2, CUI, FCI, SPRS, DFARS 7012, C3PAO, POA&M, System Security Plan, DoD Assessment Methodology, 110 controls, defense industrial base, DIB, FedRAMP equivalency.
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。
Explicit-only request to restate the previous explanation plainly in the current conversation language while preserving facts and uncertainty.
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 learner's technical level is unknown or uncertain, requiring diagnostic calibration before teaching begins.
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。
Gauntlet for absolute claims (always/never/guaranteed/optimal); pressure-test, then refine with explicit boundaries. Use when users ask to prove or disprove strong certainty claims, request devil's-advocate challenge rounds, or want the /tw-prove-it gauntlet to run all 10 rounds continuously by default.
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 over-engineered codebases by factoring layers into live obligations, quotienting redundant distinctions, ablating unearned surface, and normalizing survivors while preserving required behavior. Use when change latency or agent difficulty comes from frameworks, plugins, DI, codegen, task runners, config indirection, ORMs, GraphQL, monorepo/infra tooling, or web stacks, or when asked to remove layers. Produces an evidence-backed Reduction Certificate, cuts, migration phases, proof signals, and rollback. Not for one local readability cleanup (use tw-complexity-mitigator).
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。
Set up bundle IDs, capabilities, signing certificates, provisioning profiles, and encrypted signing sync with the asc cli. Use when onboarding a new app, rotating signing assets, or sharing them across a team.
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。
Time-boxed throwaway investigation to answer one hard question. Use when facing technical uncertainty before committing to a frontier item or scoped slice — the output is knowledge, not production code.
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 someone else's PR through an architectural/strategic lens — does it shift design, raise complexity, or quietly change precedent? Drives a brief reflective discussion with the user, then posts a concise review comment via `gh`. Defers line-level and bug-hunting concerns to AI review bots and the PR author.
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 NIST Framework for Cyber-Physical Systems (SP 1500-201/202/203, v1.0, 2017). Use for engineering and analyzing cyber-physical systems (CPS) and IoT: the CPS Framework's aspect × facet grid (nine aspects of concern examined through conceptualization, realization, and assurance facets), cross-property trustworthiness risk management (safety/security/privacy/reliability/resilience together), data interoperability (syntactical/semantic/contextual, canonical models, identifiers, provenance), the timing aspect (time-interval classes, time domains, time-aware networking) and secure/resilient time (GNSS jamming/spoofing, PTP/NTP attacks, holdover, the clock-error model and Allan/MTIE metrics), plus the use-case requirements method. Bridges IT and OT under a clock. Scope limits: a 2017 living/draft document, thin on post-2017 standards and on detailed control catalogs; it names but does not reproduce ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 and 15288 process text or permission-licensed third-party figures.
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 NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods (NIST HB 151) — the practical statistics reference for engineering, metrology, and quality. Use for: exploratory data analysis and the four univariate assumptions (4-plot); measurement process characterization including bias/precision, calibration designs, gauge R&R, and ISO/GUM uncertainty budgets; production process characterization (stability vs. capability); process modeling and regression (LS/WLS/NLS/LOESS); design of experiments (screening, fractional/factorial, response-surface, Taguchi); statistical process control (Shewhart/CUSUM/EWMA charts, capability indices, acceptance sampling); product/process comparisons (hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for 1/2/3+ groups, ANOVA, multiple comparisons); and reliability (lifetime & repair-rate models, accelerated testing, reliability growth). Scope limits: this is applied frequentist statistics for measurement and quality — it does NOT reproduce the per-distribution formula galleries, worked case studies, datasets, plot images, or Dataplot/R code of the original web Handbook (those are described, not copied); it is thin on modern machine learning, Bayesian methods beyond conjugate reliability priors, time-series/forecasting, and Bayesian experimental design.
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 OMB Circular A-94 (revised 2023-11-09) on guidelines and discount rates for benefit-cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of federal programs. Use for BCA principles, benefit/cost measurement, discount-rate policy, uncertainty/sensitivity, distributional incidence, and decision reporting. Rescoped at build to A-94 only (Army CBA Guide unreachable). Does not replace A-11 budget preparation detail, agency-specific statutory BCA rules, or Army CEAC process templates.
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 NASA-STD-7009B (Standard for Models and Simulations) with implementation depth from NASA-HDBK-7009B. Use for M&S criticality and programmatics, development evidence and capability assessment, verification/validation domains, uncertainty and sensitivity, use-phase results assessment, risk-informed decision reporting, and handbook life-cycle products. Covers STD-7009B (2024-03-05) + HDBK-7009B (2026-02-03) synthesized notes only; does not replace program-specific TA direction, NPR 7150.2 software requirements detail, or full PRA 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 NASA Fault Management Handbook (NASA-HDBK-1002, Draft 2, April 2012). Use for the systems-engineering discipline of designing what a system does when it fails — the fault/failure/anomaly vocabulary, the five FM strategies (two prevention strategies — design-time fault avoidance and operational failure avoidance — plus three tolerance strategies — failure masking, failure recovery, and goal change), the six FM process activities across NASA mission phases Pre-A to E, response-latency-versus-time-to-criticality (TTC) design trades, fault/failure containment regions and FEPPs, the four redundancy approaches, top-down FM requirements development, FM verification vs. validation, the seven dedicated FM milestone reviews (FMCR/FMARR/FMPDR/FMCDR/FMTRR/FMLRR/FMCERR), FM organizational structure, and mined NASA Lessons Learned. Space-mission oriented (flight/ground/operations); spacecraft examples throughout. IMPORTANT: built from an UNAPPROVED DRAFT — several sections (detailed architecture building blocks, the Assessment & Analysis guidance, and Operations & Maintenance) are placeholders in the source and are thin here. Thin on detailed FDIR algorithms, terrestrial/IT fault management, and any approved-standard terminology that may have changed since Draft 2.
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 NASA Cost Estimating Handbook (CEH) v4.0. Use for NASA's 12-step, three-part cost estimating process (Project Definition, Cost Methodology, Cost Estimate); the WBS, CADRe, and ONCE data backbone; estimating methodologies (analogy, parametric/CER, engineering build-up, EVM, Delphi); ground rules and assumptions, data normalization and inflation (BY/CY/RY); the point-estimate-to-S-curve cost-risk chain and Unallocated Future Expense (UFE) reserves; Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level (JCL) analysis via probabilistic cost-loaded schedules; decision-support analyses (sensitivity, trade studies, make/lease-vs-buy, affordability, CAIV); and economic analysis (discounting, NPV, OMB Circular A-94). The cost-estimating complement to NASA's SE and risk packs. Does NOT reproduce the handbook's tool-specific procedures, worked examples, or appendix-depth methods (it names the appendices), nor cover full DoD/GAO cost guides, schedule construction, or formal risk management beyond the cost interface.
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。
Canalización automatizada de desarrollo de software. Escanea proyectos, prioriza tareas, analiza código u orquesta bucles de desarrollo. Cero dependencias (solo la biblioteca estándar de Python).
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。
Prepares a DRAFT data incident impact brief from the incident notes and data inventory the user provides: the timeline as stated, systems involved matched to the inventory, data categories held and evidenced as involved, people and record counts potentially affected with the source and method behind every figure, third parties, notification questions for legal and the data protection officer, and every UNKNOWN with the evidence that would settle it. No legal determination: it never states whether the incident is a reportable breach, whether notice is due, to whom or by when. Use when the user asks to "prepare the impact brief for this incident", "what data was involved", "how many people are affected", "map the incident to our data inventory" or "pull together what legal needs on the incident". Do not use for the blameless postmortem or root-cause timeline, use incident-postmortem-drafter instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.
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。