Provides procedures for managing and responding to security incidents.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/incident-response-hack23 && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/10422" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/incident-response-hack23 && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/incident-response-hack23
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.
Security incident detection, analysis, containment, eradication, recovery, and lessons learned per NIST SP 800-61r2 and ISO 27035Key capabilities
- →Detect security incidents
- →Analyze incident severity
- →Contain security threats
- →Coordinate incident response
- →Conduct post-incident analysis
How it works
It follows a structured lifecycle (detection, analysis, containment, eradication, recovery) aligned with NIST and ISO standards.
Inputs & outputs
When to use incident-response
- →Responding to security alerts
- →Managing data breaches
- →Conducting post-incident analysis
About this skill
Incident Response Skill
Purpose
This skill establishes comprehensive procedures for detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, and recovering from security incidents affecting the CIA platform. It implements systematic incident management aligned with NIST SP 800-61r2, ISO 27035, and Hack23 ISMS Incident Response Plan with measurable response times and transparent communication.
When to Use This Skill
Apply this skill when:
- ✅ Detecting security alerts or suspicious activity
- ✅ Responding to security breaches or data exposure
- ✅ Managing vulnerability exploitation incidents
- ✅ Coordinating response to service disruptions
- ✅ Handling supply chain security incidents
- ✅ Meeting GDPR 72-hour breach notification requirements
- ✅ Conducting post-incident analysis and lessons learned
- ✅ Updating incident response playbooks
Do NOT use for:
- ❌ Routine maintenance or planned downtime
- ❌ Non-security operational issues
- ❌ Performance degradation without security implications
Decision Tree
%%{
init: {
'theme': 'base',
'themeVariables': {
'primaryColor': '#D32F2F',
'primaryTextColor': '#fff',
'lineColor': '#D32F2F',
'secondaryColor': '#FF9800',
'tertiaryColor': '#4CAF50'
}
}
}%%
flowchart TD
DETECT["🔍 Incident Detected"] --> VALIDATE{"✅ Confirmed<br/>Security Incident?"}
VALIDATE -->|YES| CLASSIFY{"🏷️ Classify Severity"}
VALIDATE -->|NO| FALSE["📋 False Positive<br/>Document & Close"]
CLASSIFY -->|🔴 Critical<br/>€10K+ daily loss| S1["🔴 S1: Critical Response<br/>RTO: 30 min<br/>All Stakeholders"]
CLASSIFY -->|🟠 High<br/>€5-10K daily loss| S2["🟠 S2: High Response<br/>RTO: 1 hour<br/>Key Stakeholders"]
CLASSIFY -->|🟡 Medium<br/>€1-5K daily loss| S3["🟡 S3: Medium Response<br/>RTO: 4 hours<br/>Internal Only"]
CLASSIFY -->|🟢 Low<br/><€1K daily loss| S4["🟢 S4: Low Response<br/>RTO: 24 hours<br/>Documentation"]
S1 --> ACTIVATE["🚨 Activate Response Team<br/>CEO + Specialists"]
S2 --> ACTIVATE
S3 --> ACTIVATE
S4 --> ACTIVATE
ACTIVATE --> CONTAIN["🛡️ Containment<br/>Isolate & Preserve"]
CONTAIN --> INVESTIGATE["🔬 Investigation<br/>Root Cause Analysis"]
INVESTIGATE --> REMEDIATE["🔧 Remediation<br/>Fix & Restore"]
REMEDIATE --> VALIDATE_FIX{"✅ Validated?"}
VALIDATE_FIX -->|NO| REMEDIATE
VALIDATE_FIX -->|YES| NOTIFY{"📢 External<br/>Notification<br/>Required?"}
NOTIFY -->|YES - GDPR| GDPR["📢 GDPR Notification<br/>72-hour deadline"]
NOTIFY -->|YES - NIS2| NIS2["📢 NIS2 Notification<br/>24-hour initial"]
NOTIFY -->|YES - Customers| CUSTOMER["📢 Customer Notice<br/>Per SLA"]
NOTIFY -->|NO| DOCUMENT
GDPR --> DOCUMENT["📝 Incident Report"]
NIS2 --> DOCUMENT
CUSTOMER --> DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT --> LESSONS["📈 Lessons Learned<br/>Process Improvement"]
LESSONS --> CLOSE["✅ Close Incident<br/>Archive Evidence"]
CLOSE --> MONITOR["🔄 Continuous Monitoring"]
style DETECT fill:#2196F3,color:#fff
style S1 fill:#D32F2F,color:#fff
style S2 fill:#FF9800,color:#fff
style S3 fill:#FFC107,color:#000
style S4 fill:#4CAF50,color:#fff
style CONTAIN fill:#7B1FA2,color:#fff
style INVESTIGATE fill:#1565C0,color:#fff
style REMEDIATE fill:#FF9800,color:#fff
style CLOSE fill:#4CAF50,color:#fff
Incident Severity Classification
Severity Matrix
| Severity | Financial Impact | Operational Impact | RTO | Escalation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🔴 S1: Critical | €10K+ daily loss | Complete outage | 30 minutes | CEO + External Consultant |
| 🟠 S2: High | €5-10K daily loss | Major degradation | 1 hour | CEO + Insurance Provider |
| 🟡 S3: Medium | €1-5K daily loss | Partial impact | 4 hours | CEO Investigation |
| 🟢 S4: Low | <€1K daily loss | Minor inconvenience | 24 hours | CEO Scheduled Review |
Incident Classification Examples
🔴 S1: Critical Incidents
- Ransomware infection affecting production systems
- Active data breach with PII exposure
- Complete service outage affecting all users
- Successful credential theft with admin access
- Criminal liability (GDPR Article 83 violations)
🟠 S2: High Incidents
- Exploitation of critical vulnerability (CVSS 9.0+)
- Partial data exposure (limited user data)
- Major service degradation (>50% users affected)
- Unauthorized access to sensitive systems
- Regulatory investigation triggered
🟡 S3: Medium Incidents
- Attempted exploitation (blocked by controls)
- Security misconfigurations discovered
- Malware detected and quarantined
- Moderate service impact (<50% users)
- Minor compliance violations
🟢 S4: Low Incidents
- Failed login attempts (below threshold)
- Security scan false positives
- Minor policy violations
- Suspicious activity with no impact
- Documentation issues
Incident Response Lifecycle
Phase 1: Preparation
Pre-Incident Readiness:
Incident_Response_Team:
- CEO: James Pether Sörling (Incident Commander)
- Security Lead: Primary responder
- Development Lead: Technical remediation
- External Consultant: On-call security expert
- Legal Counsel: GDPR/regulatory compliance
- Insurance Provider: Cyber insurance liaison
Tools_and_Resources:
- AWS Detective: Log analysis and investigation
- AWS Security Hub: Centralized security findings
- AWS GuardDuty: Threat detection
- GitHub Security: Repository security monitoring
- CloudWatch Logs Insights: Query and analysis
- Incident Response Playbooks: Scenario-specific procedures
Communication_Channels:
- Primary: CEO email ([email protected])
- Secondary: GitHub Issues (private security issues)
- Emergency: AWS Support (Enterprise plan)
- External: External Stakeholder Registry contacts
- Documentation: ISMS-PUBLIC repository updates
Evidence_Preservation:
- AWS CloudTrail: 90-day retention
- Application Logs: CloudWatch 30-day retention
- Database Audit Logs: 90-day retention
- Network Flow Logs: VPC Flow Logs 7-day retention
- Backup Snapshots: Automated daily backups
Preparation Checklist:
- Incident Response Plan: Reviewed and updated quarterly
- Contact List: Current and tested (External Stakeholder Registry)
- Playbooks: Scenario-specific procedures documented
- Tools: AWS security services enabled and monitored
- Training: Annual tabletop exercises conducted
- Backups: Verified and tested monthly
- Insurance: Cyber insurance policy active and adequate
- Legal: Retainer with legal counsel for GDPR compliance
Phase 2: Detection and Analysis
Detection Sources:
flowchart LR
subgraph "🔍 Automated Detection"
GUARD[AWS GuardDuty<br/>Threat Detection]
SECHUB[AWS Security Hub<br/>Findings Aggregation]
CODEQL[CodeQL<br/>Code Scanning]
DEPEND[Dependabot<br/>Vulnerability Alerts]
end
subgraph "👁️ Manual Detection"
USER[User Report<br/>Security Concern]
AUDIT[Security Audit<br/>Findings]
RESEARCH[Security Researcher<br/>Disclosure]
MONITOR[System Monitoring<br/>Anomalies]
end
subgraph "🎯 Incident Triage"
VALIDATE[Validate Incident]
CLASSIFY[Classify Severity]
ASSIGN[Assign Response Team]
end
GUARD --> VALIDATE
SECHUB --> VALIDATE
CODEQL --> VALIDATE
DEPEND --> VALIDATE
USER --> VALIDATE
AUDIT --> VALIDATE
RESEARCH --> VALIDATE
MONITOR --> VALIDATE
VALIDATE --> CLASSIFY
CLASSIFY --> ASSIGN
style VALIDATE fill:#FF9800,color:#fff
style CLASSIFY fill:#D32F2F,color:#fff
style ASSIGN fill:#1565C0,color:#fff
Initial Assessment Checklist:
- Incident Confirmed: Validate security incident vs. false positive
- Scope Identified: Affected systems, data, and users documented
- Timeline Established: Initial detection and estimated start time
- Severity Classified: Using severity matrix (S1-S4)
- Evidence Preserved: Logs, snapshots, and artifacts collected
- Team Notified: Response team activated per severity level
- Stakeholders Informed: CEO notified within RTO
- Communication Plan: Notification requirements assessed
Analysis Activities:
# 1. Collect AWS CloudTrail logs
aws cloudtrail lookup-events \
--lookup-attributes AttributeKey=EventName,AttributeValue=AssumeRole \
--start-time 2024-01-15T00:00:00Z \
--end-time 2024-01-16T00:00:00Z \
--max-results 100 \
> incident-cloudtrail-logs.json
# 2. Query CloudWatch Logs
aws logs filter-log-events \
--log-group-name /aws/lambda/cia-production \
--start-time $(date -d '24 hours ago' +%s)000 \
--filter-pattern "ERROR" \
> incident-application-logs.txt
# 3. Check AWS GuardDuty findings
aws guardduty list-findings \
--detector-id YOUR_DETECTOR_ID \
--finding-criteria '{"Criterion":{"severity":{"Gte":7}}}' \
--sort-criteria '{"AttributeName":"updatedAt","OrderBy":"DESC"}' \
> incident-guardduty-findings.json
# 4. Review AWS Security Hub findings
aws securityhub get-findings \
--filters '{"SeverityLabel":[{"Value":"CRITICAL","Comparison":"EQUALS"}]}' \
--max-results 100 \
> incident-securityhub-findings.json
# 5. Analyze access patterns
aws cloudtrail lookup-events \
--lookup-attributes AttributeKey=Username,AttributeValue=SUSPECTED_USER \
--start-time 2024-01-15T00:00:00Z \
> incident-user-activity.json
# 6. Create evidence package
tar -czf incident-evidence-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S).tar.gz \
incident-*.json incident-*.txt
Phase 3: Containment
Short-Term Containment:
Immediate_Actions:
Network_Isolation:
- Action: Isolate affected systems from network
- Method: AWS Security Group rule changes
---
*Content truncated.*
When not to use it
- →Routine maintenance
- →Non-security operational issues
Limitations
- →Requires manual classification
- →Requires adherence to defined RTOs
How it compares
This provides a systematic, industry-standard incident management framework compared to ad-hoc response efforts.
Compared to similar skills
incident-response side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| incident-response (this skill) | 0 | 2mo | Review | Advanced |
| protocol-reverse-engineering | 9 | 6mo | Review | Advanced |
| equilateral-agents | 5 | 9mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| secops-triage | 4 | 7mo | No flags | Intermediate |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
More by Hack23
View all by Hack23 →You might also like
protocol-reverse-engineering
wshobson
Master network protocol reverse engineering including packet analysis, protocol dissection, and custom protocol documentation. Use when analyzing network traffic, understanding proprietary protocols, or debugging network communication.
equilateral-agents
Equilateral-AI
22 production-ready AI agents with database-driven orchestration for security reviews, code quality analysis, deployment validation, infrastructure checks, and compliance. Auto-activates for security concerns, deployment tasks, code reviews, quality checks, and compliance questions. Includes upgrade paths to enterprise features (GDPR, HIPAA, multi-account AWS, ML-based optimization).
secops-triage
Expert guidance for security alert triage. Use this when the user asks to "triage" an alert or case.
netflows
BrownFineSecurity
Network flow extractor that analyzes pcap/pcapng files to identify outbound connections with automatic DNS hostname resolution. Use when you need to enumerate network destinations, identify what hosts a device communicates with, or map IP addresses to hostnames from packet captures.
azure-bgp
benchflow-ai
Analyze and resolve BGP oscillation and BGP route leaks in Azure Virtual WAN–style hub-and-spoke topologies (and similar cloud-managed BGP environments). Detect preference cycles, identify valley-free violations, and propose allowed policy-level mitigations while rejecting prohibited fixes.
secops-investigate
Expert guidance for deep security investigations. Use this when the user asks to "investigate" a case, entity, or incident.