agentleFS
Sign inStart free
grcmanagrcmana/grcskills/skills/cyber-essentials-scoping/SKILL.md

cyber-essentials-scoping

Skill2 starsChanged 14 days agoMITView on GitHub

Scope and pre-assess a UK Cyber Essentials / Cyber Essentials Plus certification (Requirements v3.3, Danzell question set) — building the device, cloud service and network inventory, checking the five technical controls (firewalls, secure configuration, security update management, user access control incl. mandatory MFA, malware protection), and listing fail risks before submission. Use for "Cyber Essentials", "CE+", "get CE certified", "CE scope", or "will we pass Cyber Essentials".

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions1 project uses a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 1

    1. grcmana/grc-os★ 299% same

    Wrote their own version · 0

    None found.

    How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.

  • In this repository11 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

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

    Read references/grc-workspace.md and references/cyber-essentials.md first.

    line 17
  2. Very specific:

    Read grc/context/company-profile.md.

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    Don't fill in the official questionnaire for the user, or reproduce its question text.

    line 48

≈ “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

Cyber Essentials Scoping & Pre-Assessment

You get an organisation ready to submit Cyber Essentials, and optionally CE+, first time. Most failures come from scope gaps, missing MFA on a cloud service, unsupported software, and patches that miss the 14-day window.

Read references/grc-workspace.md and references/cyber-essentials.md first.

⚠️ The scheme updates every year (usually April). The pack reflects Requirements v3.3 / Danzell for assessment accounts created from 27 April 2026. Tell the user to confirm the live version, and the exact question wording, with their certification body before submitting.

Context

Read grc/context/company-profile.md. If it's missing, ask: headcount; office and remote model; company vs personal devices; OS mix; MDM; identity provider; the SaaS and cloud services in use; who manages IT.

Workflow

  1. Scope decision. Recommend whole-organisation scope (the default). If a sub-set is proposed, check it's network-segregated and clearly named, and explain the trade-off: a narrower certificate means less customer assurance.
  2. Inventory. Build grc/audits/ce-scope.md from assets/ce-scope-template.md:
    • End-user devices by OS and version (counts, not serials), company vs BYOD. Note whether each OS version is vendor-supported.
    • Servers and VMs (including cloud IaaS)
    • Network devices: firewalls and routers (office), including boundary firewall ownership
    • Cloud services (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS): every service the organisation uses for work, with MFA status. Prompt for the commonly forgotten ones: code hosting, password manager, CRM, finance and payroll, HR, design tools, AI tools, DNS and registrar.
    • Users and admin accounts: counts, separate admin accounts (y/n)
  3. Control pre-check. Walk the five controls, in batches, with plain-English questions. Record each as ✅ / ⚠️ / ❌ with the reason.
    • Firewalls
    • Secure configuration
    • Security update management: the 14-day rule for critical/high, and unsupported software
    • User access control: MFA on all cloud services where available, admin separation, password approach
    • Malware protection
  4. Fail-risk list. List every ❌ and ⚠️ as a remediation item, with an owner and a fix. Mark hard fails clearly: any cloud service without MFA where it's available, unsupported software in scope, patching outside 14 days, default passwords, admin accounts used for email and browsing.
  5. CE+ readiness (if targeted): note the technical audit expectations (sampled devices, authenticated vulnerability scans, MFA checks, malware tests), and check that the patch and anti-malware evidence will stand up to sampling.

Outputs

  • grc/audits/ce-scope.md: scope statement, inventory, control pre-check, fail-risk list
  • Optionally, add material gaps to grc/risks/risk-register.csv (category security, framework ref CE:<control>)
  • A summary in chat: ready / not-ready, hard-fail count, the top five fixes in order, and an estimated time to submission
  • A run log in grc/runs/

Guardrails

  • Don't fill in the official questionnaire for the user, or reproduce its question text. Prepare them to answer accurately.
  • The declaration is signed by a board member or equivalent, and answers must be true. Never suggest answering "yes" to something not yet in place.
  • Device inventories hold counts and models, not personal data about users.

References

  • references/grc-workspace.md
  • references/cyber-essentials.md

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.

Check your setup, free