本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

brand-impersonation-response

Respond to a brand or executive impersonation incident — deepfaked executives, cloned support lines, fake apps, spoofed domains, or AI-generated scam content wearing your name. Use when a deepfake of a leader is circulating, customers report a fake version of your product or support channel, or to prepare the impersonation playbook before it happens. Produces an incident response: verification protocol, takedown sequencing by platform, customer and public communications, and the hardening plan. For general crisis comms use press-release/pm-crisis skills; for security incidents inside your systems use security-incident-response.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

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。

Brand Impersonation Response Skill

Cheap generative tools made impersonation an industrial product: a CEO deepfake pushing a token, a cloned support line harvesting card numbers, a spoofed checkout collecting credentials. The attack isn't on your systems — it's on your customers' trust, using your face. Speed and sequencing decide the damage; this skill runs both.

What This Skill Produces

  • A verification protocol — confirm it's fake, preserve evidence, assess reach before amplifying it
  • A takedown sequence by platform/registrar/store, with the escalation paths that actually work
  • Communications for each audience: targeted customers, all customers, public, employees, and (deepfaked) the impersonated person
  • A hardening plan so the next attempt lands softer

Required Inputs

Ask for (if not already provided):

  • What's circulating: the artifact (video/audio/site/app/account), where it lives, how it was discovered
  • The harm mechanism: financial scam? credential harvesting? reputation/market manipulation? (Drives urgency and legal posture)
  • Reach so far — views, victim reports, whether it's spreading or stagnant
  • Who's impersonated — the brand, a product surface, or a named human (a deepfaked person is also a victim; the response includes them)

Response Method

Phase 1 — Verify and preserve (first hours). Confirm fabrication with the impersonated party directly (deepfakes are good; "that's obviously fake" is not a verification method). Preserve everything before takedowns delete the evidence: URLs, hashes, screen recordings, WHOIS, wallet addresses, timestamps — the takedown kills the scam, the evidence supports fraud referrals and platform escalation. Quietly assess reach; do not publicly respond yet — a statement about a 400-view scam gives it 40,000.

Phase 2 — Contain (same day). Takedowns in parallel, sequenced by harm-per-hour:

  • Payment/credential harvesting first: hosting provider + registrar (impersonation/phishing abuse reports), Google Safe Browsing / Microsoft SmartScreen flagging (kills most browser traffic faster than the registrar acts), payment processor fraud teams if cards are flowing
  • Platforms: impersonation reports via brand/IP channels, not generic user reports — trademark-based reports move in hours where "report account" moves in weeks; file with rights documentation attached
  • App stores: developer-impersonation + trademark claims through the formal IP channels
  • Route it as fraud, not just abuse, where money moved: law enforcement referral (IC3 or local equivalent) — platforms escalate faster with a case number Log every report: platform, ticket, time — the log is the escalation tool when nothing moves.

Phase 3 — Communicate (as reach demands). The proportionality rule: warn the targeted, inform the asking, broadcast only when reach forces it.

  • Targeted/victimised customers immediately: what happened, what we will never ask (the anchor line: "we will never DM you for payment/credentials/wallet transfers"), what to do if they engaged, one report channel
  • The impersonated executive (deepfake cases): they're a victim, not just an asset — align their personal statement with the company's; one voice
  • Public statement only past the reach threshold: short, factual, no link or screenshot of the fake, the never-ask anchor, the report channel. Never repeat the scam's claims in the correction (repetition entrenches)
  • Support + social teams get the script before the public does — they're already getting the questions

Phase 4 — Harden (the week after). Verification anchors customers can check (verified handles list on your domain, DMARC/BIMI, signed comms for high-stakes messages) · monitoring for the next round (domain-permutation watch, brand-mention alerts, app-store sweeps — impersonators retry) · the internal deepfake protocol (a "CEO" voice call requesting a transfer gets a callback on a known number — write it down now) · pre-registered abuse contacts at the platforms that were slow this time.

Output Format

Impersonation Response: [what's circulating] — [date]

Verification: [how fabrication was confirmed · evidence preserved (list) · reach assessment]

Takedown log

TargetChannel usedFiledStatusEscalation path

Communications (drafted, per audience): [targeted-customer notice · support script · public statement (with its reach trigger) · executive's personal statement if applicable]

The never-ask anchor: [the exact line, everywhere]

Hardening plan: [verification anchors · monitoring · internal deepfake protocol · owner + dates]

Quality Checks

  • Evidence was preserved before takedowns were filed
  • Takedowns route through IP/trademark channels with documentation, not generic reports
  • Public response is gated on a stated reach threshold, not reflex
  • No communication links, screenshots, or restates the scam's content
  • Money-moved cases include the law-enforcement referral
  • The hardening plan includes the internal voice-deepfake protocol

Anti-Patterns

  • Do not amplify a low-reach scam with a high-reach denial — proportionality is the discipline
  • Do not file generic "report this account" tickets when trademark channels exist — wrong queue, weeks lost
  • Do not let takedowns destroy the evidence — preserve first, always
  • Do not leave the deepfaked human out of the response — an executive learning the plan from the press release is a second incident
  • Do not treat it as a one-off — impersonation that worked once is a campaign; monitoring is part of the response, not the postscript

Example Trigger Phrases

  • "A deepfake of our CEO is going around."
  • "Customers are reporting a fake version of our app."
  • "Someone cloned our support line."
  • "Prepare an impersonation playbook before it happens."

レビュー

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。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Design a 360-degree feedback survey or write a structured 360 feedback report. Use when asked to build a 360 feedback process, write 360 feedback for a colleague, design a feedback survey, or produce a feedback report. Produces either a complete survey instrument with rating scales and open-ended questions, or a structured narrative feedback report with themes, strengths, and development areas.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Decode a 401k or workplace retirement plan — the real cost of its funds, the match's fine print, vesting math, and the plan features worth using or avoiding. Use when someone asks 'is my 401k any good', 'decode my 401k plan', 'which funds should I look at', or 'what fees am I paying'. Produces a fee decode in dollars-over-time, match and vesting math, a fund-lineup triage by cost, and the questions for HR or the plan administrator.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Design statistically rigorous A/B tests for product features, UI changes, onboarding flows, and pricing experiments. Use when asked to set up an experiment, design an A/B test, calculate sample size, or interpret test results. Produces a complete test plan with hypothesis, variant definitions, sample size, duration estimate, guardrail metrics, and a results interpretation guide.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Analyse a finished A/B test and write the readout — the result, whether it's statistically and practically significant, what it means, and the ship/no-ship call. Use when asked to analyse experiment results, write an A/B test readout, interpret test data, or decide whether to ship a variant. Produces a clear verdict with the lift and confidence, segment cuts, the risks (peeking, novelty, sample), and a recommendation. Distinct from planning a test — this reads results.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Build or tailor an academic CV for faculty, postdoc, research or fellowship applications: publications, grants, teaching, supervision and service in the order the field expects, with consistent citations. Use when asked to write my academic CV, update my CV for a lectureship, tenure-track or postdoc application, format my publications list, or adapt my academic CV for an industry research role. Produces the full academic CV, a field-appropriate section order, a clean publications list in one citation style, and a two-page summary version when asked.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Generate a WCAG 2.2 accessibility audit checklist and remediation suggestions for any UI or design. Use when asked to audit for accessibility, check WCAG compliance, review a design for a11y issues, or create an accessibility remediation plan. Produces a prioritised checklist with pass/fail assessments and specific 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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

mohitagw15856 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する