c-level-advisor/skills/ciso-advisor/SKILL.md
Security leadership for growth-stage companies. Risk quantification in dollars, compliance roadmap (SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR), security architecture strategy, incident response leadership, and board-level security reporting. Use when building security programs, justifying security budget, selecting compliance frameworks, managing incidents, assessing vendor risk, or when user mentions CISO, security strategy, compliance roadmap, zero trust, or board security reporting.
npx skillsauth add alirezarezvani/claude-skills ciso-advisorInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Risk-based security frameworks for growth-stage companies. Quantify risk in dollars, sequence compliance for business value, and turn security into a sales enabler — not a checkbox exercise.
CISO, security strategy, risk quantification, ALE, SLE, ARO, security posture, compliance roadmap, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, GDPR, zero trust, defense in depth, incident response, board security reporting, vendor assessment, security budget, cyber risk, program maturity
python scripts/risk_quantifier.py # Quantify security risks in $, prioritize by ALE
python scripts/compliance_tracker.py # Map framework overlaps, estimate effort and cost
Translate technical risks into business impact: revenue loss, regulatory fines, reputational damage. Use ALE to prioritize. See references/security_strategy.md.
Formula: ALE = SLE × ARO (Single Loss Expectancy × Annual Rate of Occurrence). Board language: "This risk has $X expected annual loss. Mitigation costs $Y."
Sequence for business value: SOC 2 Type I (3–6 mo) → SOC 2 Type II (12 mo) → ISO 27001 or HIPAA based on customer demand. See references/compliance_roadmap.md for timelines and costs.
Zero trust is a direction, not a product. Sequence: identity (IAM + MFA) → network segmentation → data classification. Defense in depth beats single-layer reliance. See references/security_strategy.md.
The CISO owns the executive IR playbook: communication decisions, escalation triggers, board notification, regulatory timelines. See references/incident_response.md for templates.
Frame security spend as risk transfer cost. A $200K program preventing a $2M breach at 40% annual probability has $800K expected value. See references/security_strategy.md.
Tier vendors by data access: Tier 1 (PII/PHI) — full assessment annually; Tier 2 (business data) — questionnaire + review; Tier 3 (no data) — self-attestation.
| Category | Metric | Target | |----------|--------|--------| | Risk | ALE coverage (mitigated risk / total risk) | > 80% | | Detection | Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) | < 24 hours | | Response | Mean Time to Respond (MTTR) | < 4 hours | | Compliance | Controls passing audit | > 95% | | Hygiene | Critical patches within SLA | > 99% | | Access | Privileged accounts reviewed quarterly | 100% | | Vendor | Tier 1 vendors assessed annually | 100% | | Training | Phishing simulation click rate | < 5% |
| When... | CISO works with... | To... | |---------|--------------------|-------| | Enterprise sales | CRO | Answer questionnaires, unblock deals | | New product features | CTO/CPO | Threat modeling, security review | | Compliance budget | CFO | Size program against risk exposure | | Vendor contracts | Legal/COO | Security SLAs and right-to-audit | | M&A due diligence | CEO/CFO | Target security posture assessment | | Incident occurs | CEO/Legal | Response coordination and disclosure |
references/security_strategy.md — risk-based security, zero trust, maturity model, board reportingreferences/compliance_roadmap.md — SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR timelines, costs, overlapsreferences/incident_response.md — executive IR playbook, communication templates, tabletop designSurface these without being asked when you detect them in company context:
| Request | You Produce | |---------|-------------| | "Assess our security posture" | Risk register with quantified business impact (ALE) | | "We need SOC 2" | Compliance roadmap with timeline, cost, effort, quick wins | | "Prep for security audit" | Gap analysis against target framework with remediation plan | | "We had an incident" | IR coordination plan + communication templates | | "Security board section" | Risk posture summary, compliance status, incident report |
Evaluate every decision through probability × impact. Quantify risks in business terms (dollars, not severity labels). Prioritize by expected annual loss.
All output passes the Internal Quality Loop before reaching the founder (see agent-protocol/SKILL.md).
company-context.md before responding (if it exists)[INVOKE:role|question]tools
Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, generating review checklists.
tools
Use when planning, funding, scoping, or synthesizing enterprise research across workstreams — clinical study design, R&D program finance, market sizing/surveys, or product/user research. Triggers on "design this clinical study", "what sample size", "R&D budget", "burn rate", "capitalize or expense", "TAM SAM SOM", "market sizing", "survey design", "segment the market", "plan user interviews", "usability test", "synthesize research insights". Forks context to route to one of four Research-Operations sub-skills (clinical-research, research-finance, market-research, product-research) and returns a digest. Distinct from ra-qm-team (regulatory submission), finance (corporate close/valuation), research/grants (funding discovery), product-team (persona/journey/live experiments), and marketing-skill (campaign analytics).
development
Use when managing the money for an internal R&D program or portfolio — building a multi-period program budget with the F&A (indirect) split, tracking burn rate and runway against value-inflection milestones, or routing R&D cost items to a capitalize-vs-expense determination. Every budget output surfaces its assumptions block; capitalize-vs-expense is decision-support only and routes to a named finance owner — it never books an entry or decides accounting treatment. Distinct from finance/financial-analysis (corporate DCF, close, valuation) and research/grants (funding discovery — this manages money already won).
development
Use when planning and synthesizing product/user research as a method-and-repository discipline — selecting the right method for the goal (generative interviews vs usability test vs concept test vs validation), computing method-based saturation/sample size with an explicit confidence level, or synthesizing coded observations into insights while flagging single-source anecdotes. Never fabricates user insight; an insight requires recurrence across independent participants. Distinct from product-team/ux-researcher-designer (persona/journey artifacts), product-discovery (discovery-sprint planning), and experiment-designer (live A/B) — this is the research-ops method + insight-repository layer.