skills/achieving-cmmc-level-2-compliance/SKILL.md
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.
npx skillsauth add mukul975/cyber-skills achieving-cmmc-level-2-complianceInstall 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.
Confirm the contract requires CMMC Level 2 (CUI present, not just FCI). FCI-only contracts are Level 1 (the 15 FAR 52.204-21 requirements). Identify CUI categories from the contract and the DoD CUI Registry.
Classify every asset into one of the CMMC scoping categories:
Minimize scope deliberately — a smaller, well-segmented CUI enclave is far cheaper to certify than a flat network.
Work the 14 families (3.1–3.14). For each requirement, implement, then write the how in the SSP. High-leverage early wins: MFA (3.5.3), FIPS-validated cryptography (3.13.11), audit logging (3.3.x), access control + least privilege (3.1.x), and incident response (3.6.x).
Start at 110 and subtract the weighted value (1, 3, or 5 points) of each unmet requirement; partial credit applies to a small number of controls (e.g., MFA, FIPS crypto). The result is the SPRS score (maximum 110; the methodology floor is −203). Post the score, the SSP date, and the assessment scope to SPRS (or eMASS for higher assessments).
Document every unmet requirement with owner, remediation, and milestone. Constraints under the CMMC rule: a Conditional status requires a score of at least 80% (≥ 88 of 110), only POA&M-eligible requirements may be deferred (the highest-weighted security requirements must be fully met — verify eligibility against 32 CFR Part 170), and all POA&M items must be closed within 180 days to convert Conditional → Final.
Certification is valid three years with annual affirmations. Maintain the SSP, re-score on change, keep evidence current, and feed significant changes back into the assessment.
| Concept | Definition | |---|---| | FCI | Federal Contract Information — Level 1 protects it (FAR 52.204-21). | | CUI | Controlled Unclassified Information — Level 2 protects it (NIST 800-171). | | 110 requirements | The SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families. | | SPRS | Supplier Performance Risk System — where the 800-171 score is posted. | | DoD Assessment Methodology | The 1/3/5-point weighting used to compute the score from 110. | | C3PAO | CMMC Third-Party Assessment Organization — performs Level 2 certification. | | POA&M | Plan of Action & Milestones — limited, must close in 180 days for Final status. | | Conditional vs Final | Conditional = open POA&M (score ≥ 80%); Final = all controls met. | | ESP | External Service Provider — must meet FedRAMP Moderate / equivalency for CUI. | | Scoping categories | CUI / Security Protection / Contractor Risk Managed / Specialized / Out-of-Scope. |
Produce a CMMC Level 2 Readiness Report using assets/template.md, containing:
Use scripts/process.py to compute the SPRS score from a control-status JSON, flag POA&M-eligibility concerns, and report the gap to the conditional-certification threshold.
testing
Detect AWS IAM privilege escalation paths using boto3 and Cloudsplaining policy analysis to identify overly permissive policies, dangerous permission combinations, and least-privilege violations
tools
Automate AWS GuardDuty threat detection findings processing using EventBridge and Lambda to enable real-time incident response, automatic quarantine of compromised resources, and security notification workflows.
development
Detecting exposed AWS credentials in source code repositories, CI/CD pipelines, and configuration files using TruffleHog, git-secrets, and AWS-native detection mechanisms to prevent credential theft and unauthorized account access.
development
Detect unusual API call patterns in AWS CloudTrail logs using boto3, statistical baselining, and behavioral analysis to identify credential compromise, privilege escalation, and unauthorized resource access.