Unnamed Skill
Use for formal compliance audits requiring documentation (SOC2, PCI-DSS, HIPAA, GDPR, ISO 27001). Enforces TodoWrite with 20+ items. Triggers: "compliance audit", "regulatory assessment", "auditor documentation". NOT for casual PR checks. If thinking "ad-hoc review" - use this.
$ Instalar
git clone https://github.com/pvillega/claude-templates /tmp/claude-templates && cp -r /tmp/claude-templates/.claude/skills/security-compliance-audit ~/.claude/skills/claude-templates// tip: Run this command in your terminal to install the skill
name: security-compliance-audit description: Use for formal compliance audits requiring documentation (SOC2, PCI-DSS, HIPAA, GDPR, ISO 27001). Enforces TodoWrite with 20+ items. Triggers: "compliance audit", "regulatory assessment", "auditor documentation". NOT for casual PR checks. If thinking "ad-hoc review" - use this.
Security Compliance Audit
When to Use
ONLY for formal compliance requiring documentation:
- Compliance audits (SOC2, PCI-DSS, HIPAA, GDPR, ISO 27001)
- Pre-release security assessments for regulated industries
- Post-incident reviews for stakeholders/regulators
- Third-party security due diligence with contractual requirements
DO NOT use for:
- Ad-hoc code reviews (default security thinking is sufficient)
- Pull request security checks
- Quick vulnerability fixes
MANDATORY FIRST STEP
CREATE TodoWrite with these sections (20+ items total):
| Section | Minimum Items |
|---|---|
| OWASP Top 10 Checklist | 10 (one per category) |
| Process Steps | 7 (scope, scan, collect, classify, analyze, plan, verify) |
| Deliverables | 3 (audit report, vulnerability register, verification tests) |
Do not begin audit until TodoWrite is verified.
Verification Checkpoint
After creating TodoWrite, verify 3 random items pass this test:
Each item must have ALL THREE:
- ✓ Specific vulnerability category ("SQL injection", "broken access control")
- ✓ Evidence requirement ("code location", "reproduction steps", "proof-of-concept")
- ✓ Severity classification ("critical/high/medium/low with CVSS score")
| ❌ FAILS | ✅ PASSES |
|---|---|
| "Check authentication" | "Audit authentication: weak passwords (CVSS 7.5 High), session fixation (CVSS 6.5 Medium), MFA bypass (CVSS 9.0 Critical) with PoC for each" |
| "Review dependencies" | "Scan dependencies: npm audit, identify CVEs with CVSS >7.0, document affected packages, version with fix, update timeline" |
| "Document findings" | "Security audit report: executive summary with risk overview, 15 findings with severity/evidence/remediation, compliance gap analysis, prioritized roadmap" |
DO NOT PROCEED until 20+ items AND quality check passes.
Process
1. Define Scope
- Components to audit
- Compliance standards to verify
- Audit depth (surface vs deep)
2. Vulnerability Scanning (OWASP Top 10)
TodoWrite: Create audit checklist (10+ items)
- Broken Access Control: Authorization bypasses, IDOR
- Cryptographic Failures: Weak encryption, exposed secrets
- Injection: SQL, command, NoSQL, LDAP
- Insecure Design: Missing security controls, threat model gaps
- Security Misconfiguration: Default configs, missing patches
- Vulnerable Components: Outdated dependencies, known CVEs
- Authentication Failures: Weak passwords, session fixation
- Software/Data Integrity: Unsigned packages, insecure deserialization
- Logging/Monitoring Failures: Insufficient logging, no alerting
- SSRF: Server-side request forgery
3. Evidence Collection
For each finding:
- Code location or config file
- Reproduction steps
- Proof-of-concept (where appropriate)
- Attack scenario
4. Severity Classification (CVSS)
| Severity | Score | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | 9.0-10.0 | Immediate |
| High | 7.0-8.9 | Within 1 week |
| Medium | 4.0-6.9 | Within 1 month |
| Low | 0.1-3.9 | When convenient |
5. Compliance Gap Analysis
Against standards (OWASP, PCI-DSS, SOC2):
- Requirements not met
- Partially compliant areas
- Evidence of compliance
- Remediation roadmap
6. Remediation Planning
Prioritize by severity + exploitability:
- Quick wins (high severity, low effort)
- Strategic fixes (high severity, high effort)
- Incremental improvements (medium severity)
- Accepted risks (documented trade-offs)
7. Verification Testing
After fixes:
- Re-test each vulnerability
- Confirm fix doesn't introduce new issues
- Update audit report with verification status
Deliverables
Security Audit Report:
- Executive summary with risk overview
- Findings with severity, evidence, remediation
- Compliance gap analysis
- Remediation roadmap with priorities
Vulnerability Register:
- Tracking document for all findings
Verification Test Results:
- Evidence of remediation
Red Flags - STOP When You Think:
| Thought | Reality |
|---|---|
| "Ad-hoc review is fine" | Compliance requires documented, auditable, systematic review - not spot checks |
| "OWASP is overkill" | OWASP Top 10 is industry MINIMUM standard - regulators expect it |
| "Quick security check" | Formal audits produce legally-binding documentation - can't rush compliance |
| "Too much process" | Incomplete audit documentation fails regulatory review - re-audit costs 10-20x more |
| "We'll document findings later" | Audit documentation IS the deliverable - findings without evidence are inadmissible |
| "Skip verification testing" | Unverified remediation means compliance gaps persist - auditors will reject |
Response Templates
"Just do an ad-hoc review"
❌ BLOCKED: You requested compliance audit, which requires systematic documentation.
What you asked for: Formal security audit with auditable documentation What ad-hoc review provides: Undocumented observations with no compliance value
Required to override:
- Confirm scope change to ad-hoc review (not compliance audit)
- Accept that audit report cannot be used for regulatory purposes
- Acknowledge compliance gaps will remain undocumented
- Remove compliance standards from scope (SOC2, PCI-DSS, HIPAA, etc.)
"OWASP is too comprehensive"
❌ BLOCKED: OWASP Top 10 is industry minimum for security compliance.
Compliance standards require:
- SOC2 CC6.1: OWASP coverage mandatory
- PCI-DSS 6.5: Requires OWASP training and scanning
- ISO 27001 A.14.2: Secure development includes OWASP
Required to override:
- Written exemption from compliance officer
- Alternative security framework with regulatory approval
- Risk acceptance for excluded vulnerability categories
- Documentation explaining why OWASP doesn't apply
Reality check:
- OWASP Top 10 represents 80% of real-world vulnerabilities
- Audit without OWASP fails regulatory review
- Time investment: 2-4 hours for comprehensive OWASP scan
"We don't have time for full audit"
❌ BLOCKED: Partial compliance audit has zero compliance value.
Time investment:
- OWASP checklist: 2-4 hours
- Evidence collection: 4-8 hours
- Report writing: 2-4 hours
- Total: 8-16 hours
Compared to:
- Failed audit requiring re-audit: 16-32 hours
- Regulatory fine for non-compliance: $10K-$1M+
- Incident response for missed vulnerability: $50K-$500K
Verification Before Complete
After completing all steps, verify:
| Section | Requirements |
|---|---|
| Scope | ✓ Components defined ✓ Standards identified ✓ Depth determined |
| OWASP Scan | ✓ All 10 categories checked ✓ Findings documented ✓ Evidence collected |
| Evidence | ✓ Code locations ✓ Reproduction steps ✓ Proof-of-concept where needed |
| Severity | ✓ CVSS scores ✓ Priority ranking ✓ Action timeline |
| Compliance | ✓ Gap analysis ✓ Requirements mapping ✓ Compliance evidence |
| Remediation | ✓ Prioritized roadmap ✓ Quick wins identified ✓ Risk acceptance documented |
| Verification | ✓ Re-testing completed ✓ Fix validation ✓ Report updated |
If any section incomplete, audit cannot be considered complete.
Anti-Patterns
❌ Ad-hoc review without checklist ❌ No severity classification ❌ Findings without evidence ❌ No re-test after fixes
✅ Systematic checklist-based audit ✅ CVSS severity scoring ✅ Evidence for every finding ✅ Verification testing
Repository
