external/anthropic-cybersecurity-skills/skills/performing-asset-criticality-scoring-for-vulns/SKILL.md
Build a multi-factor asset criticality scoring model—incorporating data sensitivity, business function dependency, regulatory scope, network exposure, and recoverability—to produce a 1-5 criticality tier that weights vulnerability prioritization and remediation SLAs. Use when prioritizing vulnerability remediation by business impact or aligning CMDB asset data with risk-based patching timelines.
npx skillsauth add seikaikyo/dash-skills performing-asset-criticality-scoring-for-vulnsInstall 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.
Asset criticality scoring assigns a business impact rating to each IT asset so that vulnerability remediation efforts focus on systems with the greatest organizational risk. Without criticality context, a CVSS 9.0 vulnerability on a test server receives the same urgency as the same vulnerability on a payment processing database. This skill covers building a multi-factor scoring model incorporating data sensitivity, business function dependency, regulatory scope, network exposure, and recoverability to create a 1-5 criticality tier that directly modifies vulnerability remediation SLAs.
| Factor | Weight | Score Range | Description | |--------|--------|-------------|-------------| | Business Function Impact | 25% | 1-5 | How critical is the supported business process | | Data Sensitivity | 25% | 1-5 | Type and sensitivity of data processed/stored | | Regulatory Scope | 15% | 1-5 | Regulatory requirements (PCI, HIPAA, SOX) | | Network Exposure | 15% | 1-5 | Internet-facing vs internal-only | | Recoverability | 10% | 1-5 | RTO/RPO requirements, DR capability | | User Population | 10% | 1-5 | Number of users/customers affected |
| Tier | Score Range | Label | SLA Modifier | Examples | |------|------------|-------|-------------|---------| | 1 | 4.5-5.0 | Crown Jewels | -50% SLA | Domain controllers, payment systems, ERP | | 2 | 3.5-4.4 | High Value | -25% SLA | Email servers, HR systems, CI/CD | | 3 | 2.5-3.4 | Standard | Baseline SLA | Internal apps, file servers | | 4 | 1.5-2.4 | Low Impact | +25% SLA | Test environments, printers | | 5 | 1.0-1.4 | Minimal | +50% SLA | Decommissioning, isolated labs |
| Score | Classification | Examples | |-------|---------------|---------| | 5 | Restricted/Secret | PII, PHI, payment card data, trade secrets | | 4 | Confidential | Financial reports, HR records, source code | | 3 | Internal | Internal documents, policies, project files | | 2 | Semi-public | Marketing materials, press releases (draft) | | 1 | Public | Published content, public APIs |
class AssetCriticalityScorer:
"""Multi-factor asset criticality scoring engine."""
WEIGHTS = {
"business_function": 0.25,
"data_sensitivity": 0.25,
"regulatory_scope": 0.15,
"network_exposure": 0.15,
"recoverability": 0.10,
"user_population": 0.10,
}
TIER_THRESHOLDS = [
(4.5, 1, "Crown Jewels", -0.50),
(3.5, 2, "High Value", -0.25),
(2.5, 3, "Standard", 0.00),
(1.5, 4, "Low Impact", 0.25),
(1.0, 5, "Minimal", 0.50),
]
def score_asset(self, asset):
"""Calculate criticality score for an asset."""
weighted_score = sum(
asset.get(factor, 3) * weight
for factor, weight in self.WEIGHTS.items()
)
score = round(weighted_score, 2)
for threshold, tier, label, sla_mod in self.TIER_THRESHOLDS:
if score >= threshold:
return {
"score": score,
"tier": tier,
"label": label,
"sla_modifier": sla_mod,
}
return {"score": score, "tier": 5, "label": "Minimal", "sla_modifier": 0.50}
def adjust_vuln_sla(self, base_sla_days, asset_tier_data):
"""Adjust vulnerability SLA based on asset criticality."""
modifier = asset_tier_data["sla_modifier"]
adjusted = int(base_sla_days * (1 + modifier))
return max(1, adjusted) # Minimum 1 day SLA
def apply_criticality_to_vulns(vulns_df, asset_scores):
"""Enrich vulnerability data with asset criticality context."""
for idx, vuln in vulns_df.iterrows():
asset_id = vuln.get("asset_id", "")
asset_data = asset_scores.get(asset_id, {"tier": 3, "sla_modifier": 0})
vulns_df.at[idx, "asset_tier"] = asset_data["tier"]
vulns_df.at[idx, "asset_label"] = asset_data.get("label", "Standard")
base_sla = get_base_sla(vuln["severity"])
adjusted_sla = int(base_sla * (1 + asset_data["sla_modifier"]))
vulns_df.at[idx, "adjusted_sla_days"] = max(1, adjusted_sla)
return vulns_df
tools
Conduct comprehensive GDPR compliance assessments by evaluating data processing activities against EU Regulation 2016/679, including Article 30 records of processing, lawful basis validation, data subject rights implementation, Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) under Article 35, breach notification procedures, international transfer safeguards (SCCs, adequacy decisions), and technical/organizational measures under Article 32. Use when processing personal data of EU residents, preparing for supervisory authority audits, implementing privacy-by-design for new systems, scoping compliance gaps for M&A due diligence, assessing third-party processors, or responding to data subject access requests at scale. Incorporates 2026 guidance from ICO, EDPB, and post-Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 UK-GDPR considerations. Do not use for implementing specific Article 32 controls — use implementing-gdpr-data-protection-controls; or for DSAR automation — use implementing-gdpr-data-subject-access-request.
tools
Parse Windows forensic artifacts—$MFT/$J (MFTECmd), Prefetch (PECmd), registry hives (RECmd), shellbags, and Amcache—into normalized CSV/JSON with Eric Zimmerman's EZ Tools, then load results into Timeline Explorer for analysis. Use during DFIR/incident-response investigations, after triage collection (e.g. with KAPE), to establish program execution, file/folder access, and persistence evidence from acquired forensic images.
development
Build automated multi-turn adversarial attacks against conversational LLM targets using Microsoft PyRIT's RedTeamingOrchestrator, CrescendoOrchestrator (gradual escalation), and TreeOfAttacksWithPruningOrchestrator (adaptive branching), with scorer feedback loops and persisted conversation memory. Use when single-shot LLM scanning is insufficient and you need multi-turn, scorer-driven AI red-team campaigns against a chatbot or agent.
testing
Stand up MISP, enable and cache curated threat feeds (CIRCL, abuse.ch, Feodo Tracker), apply warninglists to suppress false positives, query indicators with PyMISP, and export attributes as auto-generated Suricata/Sigma/Wazuh detection rules. Use when maturing a MISP instance to actively drive detection, curating threat feeds with quality controls, or automating IOC-to-detection pipelines for the SIEM/IDS.