Extract DPAPI-protected secrets such as credentials and browser data offline and online.
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.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
references/standards.md).NIST SP 800-30 Rev 1 defines four steps. Steps 1 and 4 bookend the assessment; Step 2 is the analytic core.
Define and document:
Work through the analytic tasks in order. The 800-30 appendices provide the reference taxonomies (D–I).
2a. Identify threat sources (Appendix D). Classify by type: Adversarial (individuals, groups, nation-states — characterize capability, intent, targeting), Accidental (user error), Structural (equipment/software failure), Environmental (natural disasters, infrastructure outages).
2b. Identify threat events (Appendix E). The specific actions a source could take (e.g., "adversary exfiltrates credentials via phishing then moves laterally"). Map adversarial events to MITRE ATT&CK techniques for traceability.
2c. Identify vulnerabilities and predisposing conditions (Appendix F). Weaknesses (missing MFA, unpatched service) and conditions that make exploitation more or less likely (internet exposure, flat network, lack of segmentation).
2d. Determine likelihood (Appendix G). Assess the likelihood that a threat event is initiated (adversarial) or occurs (non-adversarial), and the likelihood it results in adverse impact given the vulnerabilities. Combine into an overall likelihood on the agreed scale.
2e. Determine impact (Appendix H). Magnitude of harm if the event succeeds — to operations, assets, individuals, other organizations, or the nation. Express against the agreed scale and in business terms.
2f. Determine risk (Appendix I). Risk is a function of likelihood and impact. Plot each threat event on the risk matrix (e.g., likelihood × impact → Very Low … Very High). Record the risk level, the contributing factors, and uncertainty/assumptions.
Produce the risk register and an executive briefing. For each risk: the threat event, affected assets, likelihood, impact, risk level, key contributing vulnerabilities, and a recommended treatment. Rank by risk level so decision-makers see the top risks first.
Risk is not static. Define a refresh cadence and the triggers that force re-assessment (new system, major architecture change, significant incident, new threat intel). Track risk-acceptance decisions and treatment progress over time.
Hand the ranked register to risk owners. For each risk choose a treatment — mitigate (add/strengthen controls), transfer (insurance, contractual), avoid (stop the activity), or accept (document residual risk with an authorizing signature). Re-score residual risk after planned controls to show the post-treatment position.
| Concept | Definition |
|---|---|
| Threat source | The cause of a threat event: adversarial, accidental, structural, or environmental. |
| Threat event | A specific action or occurrence that could cause harm (mapped to ATT&CK for adversarial cases). |
| Vulnerability | A weakness that a threat event can exploit. |
| Predisposing condition | A condition that increases or decreases the likelihood of adverse impact (e.g., internet exposure). |
| Likelihood | The chance a threat event initiates/occurs and results in adverse impact. |
| Impact | The magnitude of harm if the event succeeds. |
| Risk | A function of likelihood and impact; the expected harm to the organization. |
| Inherent vs residual risk | Risk before vs after planned/implemented controls. |
| Risk tolerance / appetite | The level of risk leadership is willing to accept. |
| Risk register | The prioritized record of risks, scores, owners, and treatments. |
Produce a Risk Assessment Report using assets/template.md, containing:
Use scripts/process.py to score the register from a risk-input JSON (likelihood × impact → risk level on a configurable matrix), rank risks, and emit the register table.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Extract DPAPI-protected secrets such as credentials and browser data offline and online.
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, detect, and remediate Shadow Credentials misconfigurations on msDS-KeyCredentialLink in Active Directory. Focuses on access-controls, monitoring Event ID 5136, and credential-management hygiene.
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。
Create forensically sound bit-for-bit disk images using dd and dcfldd while preserving evidence integrity through hash verification.
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 dangerous ACL misconfigurations in Active Directory using ldap3 to identify GenericAll, WriteDACL, and WriteOwner abuse paths
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。
Perform static analysis of Android APK malware samples using apktool for decompilation, jadx for Java source recovery, and androguard for permission analysis, manifest inspection, and suspicious API call 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。