Aligns engineering activities with Hack23 security policies.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/hack23-information-security-policy && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/10211" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/hack23-information-security-policy && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/hack23-information-security-policy
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Hack23 Information Security Policy integration for SDLC — developer-facing mapping of ISP requirements to daily engineering activities, tooling, and evidenceKey capabilities
- →Validate PRs against security policy
- →Onboard repositories to security standards
- →Address security findings
- →Prepare audit-ready evidence
How it works
It maps high-level security policies to concrete engineering behaviors, ensuring all changes comply with Hack23 standards.
Inputs & outputs
When to use hack23-information-security-policy
- →Validate PRs against security policy
- →Onboard new repositories to security standards
- →Address security findings in code
- →Prepare audit-ready security evidence
About this skill
Hack23 Information Security Policy Integration Skill
Purpose
Translate the Hack23 Information Security Policy — the apex document of the Hack23 ISMS — into concrete, enforceable engineering behaviour for the CIA platform. This skill connects the high-level policy (CIA triad objectives, risk appetite, roles, legal duties) to the code, workflows, reviews, and evidence that actually implement it.
Where hack23-isms-compliance describes the framework and information-security-strategy describes the strategy, this skill tells an engineer or AI agent "given the ISP and its supporting policies, what must I do in this commit, PR, or design?"
When to Use
Apply this skill when:
- ✅ Starting or reviewing any code / infrastructure / documentation change that touches data, authentication, authorization, crypto, logging, or third-party integrations
- ✅ Creating or updating a GitHub issue or PR that is security-relevant
- ✅ Onboarding a new contributor, AI agent, or repository to Hack23 standards
- ✅ Responding to a CodeQL / SonarCloud / OWASP / Dependabot finding
- ✅ Classifying data, designing an API, or integrating an external source
- ✅ Preparing release notes, SBOM, SECURITY.md, or audit evidence
- ✅ Assessing whether an AI coding agent action is policy-compliant
Do NOT use for:
- ❌ Tactical incident response (use
incident-responseskill) - ❌ Deep cryptographic implementation (use
crypto-best-practices/cryptography-policy) - ❌ Framework-level compliance mapping only (use
hack23-isms-compliance)
Information Security Policy — Core Tenets (Engineering View)
The ISP is binding on all contributors, including AI agents. Its five engineering-relevant tenets are:
| # | ISP Tenet | What it means in code/PRs | Primary Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability (CIA triad) | Every change must preserve or strengthen C/I/A for affected assets; no change may silently lower a classification control. | THREAT_MODEL.md, SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md, classification labels |
| 2 | Risk-based, defence-in-depth | Controls at code, platform, CI, infra, and monitoring layers; no single point of failure. | SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md, Risk Register, ZAP/CodeQL scans |
| 3 | Least privilege & segregation of duties | Minimum IAM, minimum token scopes, CODEOWNERS review, permissions: block on every workflow. | .github/workflows/*, GitHub branch protection, IAM policies |
| 4 | Transparency & accountability | Signed commits, public security docs, SBOM, OpenSSF/CII badges, auditable logs. | OpenSSF Scorecard, CII badge, SECURITY.md, SBOM |
| 5 | Legal & regulatory alignment | GDPR, NIS2, EU CRA, ISO 27001:2022, NIST CSF 2.0, CIS v8. | CRA-ASSESSMENT.md, ISMS_COMPLIANCE_MAPPING.md, DPIA |
Supporting Policies and When Each Applies
The ISP is implemented through these supporting policies. An AI agent or developer MUST consult the ones that apply to the task at hand.
| Policy | Applies When | Key Engineering Checks |
|---|---|---|
| Secure Development Policy | Any code or build change | SAST+DAST+SCA pass, banned patterns, signed commits |
| Open Source Policy | Public repos, OSS dep changes, release | OpenSSF ≥7.0, CII Passing, SLSA 3, FOSSA pass, SBOM attached |
| Secrets Management Policy | Any credential, token, key, env var | No secrets in code, GitHub Secrets/SSM, rotation, scanning enabled |
| Cryptography Policy | TLS, hashing, encryption, signing | TLS 1.3, AES-256-GCM, bcrypt/argon2, RSA-4096/EC P-384, KMS-managed keys |
| Access Control Policy | AuthN/AuthZ, Spring Security, IAM | Least privilege, MFA, role separation, deny-by-default |
| Data Classification / CLASSIFICATION | New entity, API, log, export | Correct C/I/A label, handling controls per level |
| Data Protection Policy | Personal data, retention, export | GDPR lawful basis, retention, DSAR support |
| Privacy Policy | Any UI, log, analytics touching users | Minimal data, consent, cookies, opt-out paths |
| Vulnerability Management | Any finding from scanners | SLA: Crit 24h/7d, High 7d, Med 30d, Low 90d |
| Change Management | Releases, schema migrations, infra | CAB review, rollback plan, migration changeset |
| Backup & Recovery | DB or state change, DR tests | RPO/RTO respected, restore tested |
| Incident Response Plan | Suspected breach, outage, data loss | Ticket, classify, contain, notify ≤72h GDPR |
| Threat Modeling | New feature, API, trust boundary | STRIDE, attack tree, mitigation mapping |
| Third Party Management | New dependency, API, vendor, SaaS | License OK, CVE clean, data-sharing justified |
| Segregation of Duties | Workflow, deployment, review config | Author ≠ approver, CODEOWNERS enforced |
| AI Policy | Any AI / Copilot / agent action | EU AI Act risk-tier, OWASP LLM, human-in-the-loop |
| Information Security Strategy | Roadmap, architecture decisions | Aligned with CEO-approved risk appetite |
SDLC × ISP Responsibility Matrix
Each phase has mandatory ISP-derived checks. AI agents must confirm all items for their phase before proceeding.
┌────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SDLC Phase │ ISP-Derived Gate │
├────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Plan │ Classification set; threat model updated; DPIA if needed │
│ Design │ Least privilege; trust boundaries; crypto choices per │
│ │ Cryptography Policy; third-party review │
│ Implement │ Banned patterns avoided; input validation; output │
│ │ encoding; parameterized queries; no secrets │
│ Review │ CODEOWNERS; SoD (author ≠ approver); PR template met │
│ Build │ Pinned actions; reproducible; signed; SBOM generated │
│ Test │ ≥80% line / ≥70% branch; CodeQL + SCA pass; DAST │
│ │ baseline; negative test cases │
│ Release │ Signed artifacts; SLSA provenance; release notes; │
│ │ security advisories closed │
│ Operate │ Logging (no PII); alerting; rotation; DR test │
│ Respond │ Incident plan triggers; 72h GDPR notification path │
│ Retire │ Secure data deletion; key destruction; dep removal │
└────────────────┴──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Non-Negotiable Rules (from ISP §Acceptable Use / §Secure Engineering)
🔴 Never:
- Commit secrets, tokens, keys, or personal data — use GitHub Secrets / AWS SSM
- Disable a security control (CSRF, CSP, TLS, CodeQL) without a risk-accepted PR + CEO sign-off
- Introduce a dependency without vulnerability + license check
- Bypass CODEOWNERS, branch protection, or the signed-commit requirement
- Log request bodies, tokens, passwords, or classified data
- Ship a release with open Critical or High CVEs
- Use an unpinned GitHub Action in a workflow that has write permissions
- Process personal data without a lawful basis documented in the DPIA
🟢 Always:
- Classify new data (
Public / Internal / Confidential / Restricted) - Default to deny in authorization checks
- Parameterize all database queries
- Encode output at the rendering boundary (Vaadin
ContentMode.TEXT) - Use
@Transactionalwith explicit boundaries;readOnly = truewhere applicable - Add unit tests for the negative / unauthorized path
- Sign commits (GPG or SSH) and releases (Sigstore/cosign)
- Record security-relevant decisions in SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md / THREAT_MODEL.md
AI Agent & Copilot Guardrails (ISP + AI Policy)
These rules bind every AI agent (task-agent, stack-specialist, etc.) operating in this repo:
- Read before act — load README, copilot-instructions, and the ISP before making changes
- Classification awareness — never escalate Public → Confidential exposure inadvertently
- Minimal diff — surgical, auditable changes; no unrelated refactors
- Evidence first — every security claim cites scanner output, ISMS control, or test
- Human-in-the-loop — Critical/High security changes require human approval before merge
- Transparent reasoning — PR descriptions link to ISP / supporting policy when relevant
- No secret handling — agents never print, commit, or send secrets; only reference names
PR Policy Compliance Checklist
Paste into PR description for any security-relevant change:
Content truncated.
When not to use it
- →For tactical incident response
- →For deep cryptographic implementation
Limitations
- →Does not replace incident response
- →Requires adherence to supporting policies
How it compares
It provides a developer-facing mapping of security policies to daily activities, making compliance actionable.
Compared to similar skills
hack23-information-security-policy side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| hack23-information-security-policy (this skill) | 0 | 3mo | No flags | Advanced |
| secrets-management | 5 | 3mo | Review | Advanced |
| security-scanning-security-hardening | 3 | 4mo | No flags | Advanced |
| sast-configuration | 3 | 3mo | Review | Intermediate |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
More by Hack23
View all by Hack23 →You might also like
secrets-management
wshobson
Implement secure secrets management for CI/CD pipelines using Vault, AWS Secrets Manager, or native platform solutions. Use when handling sensitive credentials, rotating secrets, or securing CI/CD environments.
security-scanning-security-hardening
sickn33
Coordinate multi-layer security scanning and hardening across application, infrastructure, and compliance controls.
sast-configuration
wshobson
Configure Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tools for automated vulnerability detection in application code. Use when setting up security scanning, implementing DevSecOps practices, or automating code vulnerability detection.
dependency-auditor
alirezarezvani
Check dependencies for known vulnerabilities using npm audit, pip-audit, etc. Use when package.json or requirements.txt changes, or before deployments. Alerts on vulnerable dependencies. Triggers on dependency file changes, deployment prep, security mentions.
mcp-security-scan
cisco-ai-defense
Scans MCP servers, tools, prompts, and resources for security vulnerabilities using YARA rules, LLM analysis, and Cisco AI Defense API. Use this skill when the user wants to check MCP servers for security issues, detect prompt injection, tool poisoning, or analyze MCP configurations for threats.
fix-cves
okteto
Fix all CVEs in the Okteto CLI Docker image by scanning with Trivy and updating vulnerable dependencies and binaries