agentleFS
Cloud-PeekCloud-Peek/agent-skills/skills/nist-respond/SKILL.md

nist-respond

Skill1 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Walk NIST SSDF Phase 6 (Operate & Respond) and file GitHub epics for the three "Respond to Vulnerabilities" practices — RV.1 identifying and confirming vulnerabilities on an ongoing basis, RV.2 assessing, prioritizing, and remediating them, RV.3 root-cause analysis so a class of bug stops recurring. Use when standing up vulnerability management, writing a disclosure policy or SECURITY.md, setting remediation SLAs, running a post-incident review, or when the user mentions NIST SSDF, SP 800-218, SSDF phase 6, or the RV practices.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Follow the phase walkthrough protocol in references/protocol.md.

    line 42

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

NIST SSDF Phase 6 — Operate & Respond

Phase label: nist-phase-6-respond

This skill files GitHub issues. It does not write code.

What this phase is about

Once software is in production, security work becomes a question of how quickly vulnerabilities are noticed and how systematically they are closed. NIST groups these continuous-operations practices under "Respond to Vulnerabilities" (RV): identify them (RV.1), triage and fix them (RV.2), and learn from them so the same class of bug stops recurring (RV.3).

The lessons-learned loop in RV.3 feeds back into Phase 1 requirements and Phase 2 design. Secure development is a cycle, not a finish line — a root cause that keeps producing the same vulnerability is a defect in the process, not in the code.

Practices

Walk these in order — each one assumes the previous has landed. Read a practice's reference file only when you reach it, not up front.

PracticeNameReference
RV.1Identify and Confirm Vulnerabilities on an Ongoing Basisreferences/rv1.md
RV.2Assess, Prioritize, and Remediate Vulnerabilitiesreferences/rv2.md
RV.3Analyze Vulnerabilities to Identify Their Root Causesreferences/rv3.md

How to run

Follow the phase walkthrough protocol in references/protocol.md. Substitutions:

  • <PHASE_N> = 6
  • <PHASE_NAME> = Operate & Respond
  • <PHASE_LABEL> = nist-phase-6-respond
  • <PRACTICES> = RV.1, RV.2, RV.3

Phase epic title: [NIST Phase 6] Operate & Respond.

The protocol confirms scope with the user, finds or creates the phase epic, then walks each practice — checking for an existing epic, asking whether to file, link, or skip, and updating the phase epic checklist as it goes. It never creates an issue without confirmation.

Adapting to the repo

The implementation notes in each reference file are deliberately generic, because this skill is meant to run against any repository. Before drafting an epic, check what already exists — a SECURITY.md, a security label, an advisory feed subscription, an on-call rotation — and rewrite the notes around the real gaps. The most common finding is that a project has scanners producing findings but no named owner and no deadline for acting on them, which is an RV.2 problem, not an RV.1 one.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.