[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6HNBSEXR5BAVG31G37PATMZ":3,"skill-same:01M6HNBSEXR5BAVG31G37PATMZ":119},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":18,"publishedAt":39,"linkOnly":40,"markdownContent":41,"markdownBody":42,"frontMatter":43,"refName":62,"commitSha":63,"skillDirectory":64,"forksCount":65,"repositoryHtmlUrl":66,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":67,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":68,"updatedAt":69,"install":70,"resources":83},"01M6HNBSEXR5BAVG31G37PATMZ","performing-nist-csf-maturity-assessment",null,"The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0, released in February 2024, provides a comprehensive taxonomy for managing cybersecurity risk through six core Functions - Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. This skill covers...","HenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core","HenriqueMC17","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F206460478?v=4","01M6HB63HBBF18AC4H09XTB549","Henrique Monteiro Cardoso","01M6HB63NGSQXWKWCFWW2B20W0",1,"Apache-2.0","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002FSKILL.md",[],[19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38],"performing nist csf maturity assessment","maturity","performing","csf","NIST","nist csf","assessment","NIST-CSF","risk-management","t1078","risk","cybersecurity","taxonomy","functions","id","detect","respond","ov","for","core","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: performing-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\ndescription: The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0, released in February 2024, provides a comprehensive taxonomy for managing cybersecurity risk through six core Functions - Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. This skill covers...\ndomain: cybersecurity\nsubdomain: compliance-governance\ntags:\n- compliance\n- governance\n- nist\n- csf\n- maturity-assessment\n- risk-management\nnist_csf:\n- GV.OC-01\n- GV.RM-01\n- GV.PO-01\n- ID.RA-01\n- GV.OV-01\nversion: '1.0'\nauthor: mahipal\nlicense: Apache-2.0\nmitre_attack:\n- T1078\n- T1530\n- T1685.002\ncategory: performing-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\n---\n# Performing NIST CSF Maturity Assessment\n\n## Overview\nThe NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0, released in February 2024, provides a comprehensive taxonomy for managing cybersecurity risk through six core Functions: Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. This skill covers conducting a maturity assessment against the CSF, using the four Implementation Tiers (Partial, Risk-Informed, Repeatable, Adaptive) to measure organizational cybersecurity posture and create improvement roadmaps.\n\n\n## When to Use\n\n- When conducting security assessments that involve performing nist csf maturity assessment\n- When following incident response procedures for related security events\n- When performing scheduled security testing or auditing activities\n- When validating security controls through hands-on testing\n\n## Prerequisites\n- Understanding of cybersecurity risk management principles\n- Access to NIST CSF 2.0 documentation and reference tool\n- Knowledge of organizational IT\u002FOT environment and security controls\n- Stakeholder access across business units for assessment interviews\n\n## Core Concepts\n\n### CSF 2.0 Functions (6 Functions, 22 Categories)\n\n| Function | Code | Categories | Purpose |\n|----------|------|-----------|---------|\n| **Govern** | GV | 6 | Establish and monitor cybersecurity risk management strategy |\n| **Identify** | ID | 3 | Determine current cybersecurity risk to the organization |\n| **Protect** | PR | 5 | Implement safeguards to prevent or reduce risk |\n| **Detect** | DE | 2 | Find and analyze possible cybersecurity attacks |\n| **Respond** | RS | 4 | Take action regarding detected cybersecurity incidents |\n| **Recover** | RC | 2 | Restore capabilities impaired by cybersecurity incidents |\n\n### Govern Function (New in CSF 2.0)\n- GV.OC: Organizational Context\n- GV.RM: Risk Management Strategy\n- GV.RR: Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities\n- GV.PO: Policy\n- GV.OV: Oversight\n- GV.SC: Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management\n\n### Implementation Tiers\n| Tier | Name | Description |\n|------|------|-------------|\n| Tier 1 | Partial | Ad hoc, reactive; limited awareness of cybersecurity risk |\n| Tier 2 | Risk-Informed | Risk-aware but not organization-wide; approved but may not be policy |\n| Tier 3 | Repeatable | Formal policies; consistently implemented; regularly updated |\n| Tier 4 | Adaptive | Continuous improvement; real-time risk response; lessons learned integrated |\n\n## Workflow\n\n### Phase 1: Scoping and Preparation (Weeks 1-2)\n1. Define assessment scope (enterprise-wide vs. business unit)\n2. Identify stakeholders and schedule interviews\n3. Gather existing documentation (policies, procedures, architecture diagrams)\n4. Customize CSF Profile for organizational context\n5. Select assessment methodology (self-assessment, facilitated, third-party)\n\n### Phase 2: Current State Assessment (Weeks 3-6)\n1. Assess each CSF Category and Subcategory against Implementation Tiers\n2. For each subcategory, evaluate:\n   - Policy\u002Fdocumentation maturity\n   - Implementation completeness\n   - Automation level\n   - Measurement and metrics\n   - Continuous improvement evidence\n3. Score using tier criteria (1-4 scale)\n4. Document evidence supporting each tier rating\n5. Identify strengths, gaps, and improvement areas\n\n### Phase 3: Target State Definition (Weeks 7-8)\n1. Define target tier for each Function based on:\n   - Risk appetite and tolerance\n   - Industry requirements and benchmarks\n   - Regulatory obligations\n   - Available resources and budget\n2. Create Target Profile documenting desired maturity state\n3. Validate target state with executive leadership\n\n### Phase 4: Gap Analysis and Roadmap (Weeks 9-12)\n1. Compare Current Profile to Target Profile\n2. Prioritize gaps based on risk reduction potential\n3. Develop improvement roadmap with:\n   - Short-term quick wins (0-3 months)\n   - Medium-term improvements (3-12 months)\n   - Long-term strategic initiatives (12-24 months)\n4. Estimate resource requirements for each initiative\n5. Assign ownership and timelines\n\n### Phase 5: Implementation and Reassessment (Ongoing)\n1. Execute improvement roadmap initiatives\n2. Track progress against milestones\n3. Conduct periodic reassessments (annually recommended)\n4. Report maturity progress to leadership\n5. Adjust roadmap based on evolving threats and business changes\n\n## Key Artifacts\n- CSF Current Profile (by Function\u002FCategory\u002FSubcategory)\n- CSF Target Profile\n- Gap Analysis Report\n- Maturity Assessment Scorecard\n- Improvement Roadmap with Priorities\n- Executive Summary and Dashboard\n\n## Common Pitfalls\n- Assessing technology only without evaluating governance and people\n- Setting unrealistic target tiers without resource commitment\n- Treating assessment as one-time rather than continuous process\n- Ignoring the new Govern function in CSF 2.0\n- Not aligning CSF assessment with existing compliance requirements (ISO 27001, SOC 2)\n\n## References\n- NIST CSF 2.0: https:\u002F\u002Fcsf.tools\u002Freference\u002Fnist-cybersecurity-framework\u002Fv2-0\u002F\n- NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 (control catalog that maps to CSF)\n- NIST CSF 2.0 Quick Start Guides\n- CSF 2.0 Reference Tool: https:\u002F\u002Fcsrc.nist.gov\u002Fprojects\u002Fcybersecurity-framework\n","# Performing NIST CSF Maturity Assessment\n\n## Overview\nThe NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0, released in February 2024, provides a comprehensive taxonomy for managing cybersecurity risk through six core Functions: Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. This skill covers conducting a maturity assessment against the CSF, using the four Implementation Tiers (Partial, Risk-Informed, Repeatable, Adaptive) to measure organizational cybersecurity posture and create improvement roadmaps.\n\n\n## When to Use\n\n- When conducting security assessments that involve performing nist csf maturity assessment\n- When following incident response procedures for related security events\n- When performing scheduled security testing or auditing activities\n- When validating security controls through hands-on testing\n\n## Prerequisites\n- Understanding of cybersecurity risk management principles\n- Access to NIST CSF 2.0 documentation and reference tool\n- Knowledge of organizational IT\u002FOT environment and security controls\n- Stakeholder access across business units for assessment interviews\n\n## Core Concepts\n\n### CSF 2.0 Functions (6 Functions, 22 Categories)\n\n| Function | Code | Categories | Purpose |\n|----------|------|-----------|---------|\n| **Govern** | GV | 6 | Establish and monitor cybersecurity risk management strategy |\n| **Identify** | ID | 3 | Determine current cybersecurity risk to the organization |\n| **Protect** | PR | 5 | Implement safeguards to prevent or reduce risk |\n| **Detect** | DE | 2 | Find and analyze possible cybersecurity attacks |\n| **Respond** | RS | 4 | Take action regarding detected cybersecurity incidents |\n| **Recover** | RC | 2 | Restore capabilities impaired by cybersecurity incidents |\n\n### Govern Function (New in CSF 2.0)\n- GV.OC: Organizational Context\n- GV.RM: Risk Management Strategy\n- GV.RR: Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities\n- GV.PO: Policy\n- GV.OV: Oversight\n- GV.SC: Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management\n\n### Implementation Tiers\n| Tier | Name | Description |\n|------|------|-------------|\n| Tier 1 | Partial | Ad hoc, reactive; limited awareness of cybersecurity risk |\n| Tier 2 | Risk-Informed | Risk-aware but not organization-wide; approved but may not be policy |\n| Tier 3 | Repeatable | Formal policies; consistently implemented; regularly updated |\n| Tier 4 | Adaptive | Continuous improvement; real-time risk response; lessons learned integrated |\n\n## Workflow\n\n### Phase 1: Scoping and Preparation (Weeks 1-2)\n1. Define assessment scope (enterprise-wide vs. business unit)\n2. Identify stakeholders and schedule interviews\n3. Gather existing documentation (policies, procedures, architecture diagrams)\n4. Customize CSF Profile for organizational context\n5. Select assessment methodology (self-assessment, facilitated, third-party)\n\n### Phase 2: Current State Assessment (Weeks 3-6)\n1. Assess each CSF Category and Subcategory against Implementation Tiers\n2. For each subcategory, evaluate:\n   - Policy\u002Fdocumentation maturity\n   - Implementation completeness\n   - Automation level\n   - Measurement and metrics\n   - Continuous improvement evidence\n3. Score using tier criteria (1-4 scale)\n4. Document evidence supporting each tier rating\n5. Identify strengths, gaps, and improvement areas\n\n### Phase 3: Target State Definition (Weeks 7-8)\n1. Define target tier for each Function based on:\n   - Risk appetite and tolerance\n   - Industry requirements and benchmarks\n   - Regulatory obligations\n   - Available resources and budget\n2. Create Target Profile documenting desired maturity state\n3. Validate target state with executive leadership\n\n### Phase 4: Gap Analysis and Roadmap (Weeks 9-12)\n1. Compare Current Profile to Target Profile\n2. Prioritize gaps based on risk reduction potential\n3. Develop improvement roadmap with:\n   - Short-term quick wins (0-3 months)\n   - Medium-term improvements (3-12 months)\n   - Long-term strategic initiatives (12-24 months)\n4. Estimate resource requirements for each initiative\n5. Assign ownership and timelines\n\n### Phase 5: Implementation and Reassessment (Ongoing)\n1. Execute improvement roadmap initiatives\n2. Track progress against milestones\n3. Conduct periodic reassessments (annually recommended)\n4. Report maturity progress to leadership\n5. Adjust roadmap based on evolving threats and business changes\n\n## Key Artifacts\n- CSF Current Profile (by Function\u002FCategory\u002FSubcategory)\n- CSF Target Profile\n- Gap Analysis Report\n- Maturity Assessment Scorecard\n- Improvement Roadmap with Priorities\n- Executive Summary and Dashboard\n\n## Common Pitfalls\n- Assessing technology only without evaluating governance and people\n- Setting unrealistic target tiers without resource commitment\n- Treating assessment as one-time rather than continuous process\n- Ignoring the new Govern function in CSF 2.0\n- Not aligning CSF assessment with existing compliance requirements (ISO 27001, SOC 2)\n\n## References\n- NIST CSF 2.0: https:\u002F\u002Fcsf.tools\u002Freference\u002Fnist-cybersecurity-framework\u002Fv2-0\u002F\n- NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 (control catalog that maps to CSF)\n- NIST CSF 2.0 Quick Start Guides\n- CSF 2.0 Reference Tool: https:\u002F\u002Fcsrc.nist.gov\u002Fprojects\u002Fcybersecurity-framework\n",{"name":5,"tags":44,"author":49,"domain":30,"license":15,"version":50,"category":5,"nist_csf":51,"subdomain":57,"description":7,"mitre_attack":58},[45,46,47,22,48,27],"compliance","governance","nist","maturity-assessment","mahipal","1.0",[52,53,54,55,56],"GV.OC-01","GV.RM-01","GV.PO-01","ID.RA-01","GV.OV-01","compliance-governance",[59,60,61],"T1078","T1530","T1685.002","main","5eea5b3296f4673b5f481e8bcc1ba76281149f16","modules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment",0,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17","Qualquer tecnologia suficientemente avançada é indistinguível da mágica.","2026-09-28 22:40:38",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":71,"prompt":81,"zipAvailable":82},[72,75,78],{"tool":73,"command":74},"npx","npx skills add HenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core --skill performing-nist-csf-maturity-assessment",{"tool":76,"command":77},"bunx","bunx skills add HenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core --skill performing-nist-csf-maturity-assessment",{"tool":79,"command":80},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add HenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core --skill performing-nist-csf-maturity-assessment","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002FSKILL.md",true,[84,90,95,101,105,109,115],{"path":85,"resourceType":86,"resourceTypeDesc":87,"sizeBytes":88,"sourceHtmlUrl":89},"assets\u002Ftemplate.md","ASSET","资产文件",3100,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002Fassets\u002Ftemplate.md",{"path":91,"resourceType":91,"resourceTypeDesc":92,"sizeBytes":93,"sourceHtmlUrl":94},"LICENSE","许可证",11255,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002FLICENSE",{"path":96,"resourceType":97,"resourceTypeDesc":98,"sizeBytes":99,"sourceHtmlUrl":100},"references\u002Fapi-reference.md","REFERENCE","参考文档",1640,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002Freferences\u002Fapi-reference.md",{"path":102,"resourceType":97,"resourceTypeDesc":98,"sizeBytes":103,"sourceHtmlUrl":104},"references\u002Fstandards.md",3619,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002Freferences\u002Fstandards.md",{"path":106,"resourceType":97,"resourceTypeDesc":98,"sizeBytes":107,"sourceHtmlUrl":108},"references\u002Fworkflows.md",3626,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002Freferences\u002Fworkflows.md",{"path":110,"resourceType":111,"resourceTypeDesc":112,"sizeBytes":113,"sourceHtmlUrl":114},"scripts\u002Fagent.py","SCRIPT","脚本",7688,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002Fscripts\u002Fagent.py",{"path":116,"resourceType":111,"resourceTypeDesc":112,"sizeBytes":117,"sourceHtmlUrl":118},"scripts\u002Fprocess.py",17184,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fperforming-nist-csf-maturity-assessment\u002Fscripts\u002Fprocess.py",[120,149,174,196,212,233],{"skillNo":121,"name":122,"nameZh":6,"description":123,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":124,"categories":125,"keywords":131,"publishedAt":39},"01M6HPFF0RCN0X6WT5EBSV71GY","validating-backup-integrity-for-recovery","Validate backup integrity through cryptographic hash verification, automated restore testing, corruption detection, and recoverability checks to ensure backups are reliable for disaster recovery and ransomware response scenarios.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Fvalidating-backup-integrity-for-recovery\u002FSKILL.md",[126],{"categoryNo":127,"categoryName":128,"taxonomyType":129,"taxonomyTypeDesc":130},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量","SCENARIO","使用场景",[132,133,134,135,37,136,30,137,138,139,140,141,142,28,143,144,145,146,147,148],"integrity","backup","recovery","validating backup integrity for recovery","testing","validate","verification","hash-verification","incident-response","ransomware","detection","t1490","disaster-recovery","restore","incident","disaster recovery","ransomware response",{"skillNo":150,"name":151,"nameZh":6,"description":152,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":153,"categories":154,"keywords":155,"publishedAt":39},"01M6HPFAWJVFK25Q33K3T7WQ8G","triaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework","Triage and prioritize vulnerabilities using CISA's Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization (SSVC) decision tree framework to produce actionable remediation priorities.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Ftriaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework\u002FSKILL.md",[],[156,157,158,159,160,30,161,162,163,27,164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172,173],"vulnerabilities","framework","ssvc","triaging vulnerabilities with ssvc framework","with","triage and prioritize","CISA","vulnerability-management","cvss","remediation","vulnerability","prioritization","decision-tree","prioritize","decision","priorities","actionable","tree",{"skillNo":175,"name":176,"nameZh":6,"description":177,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":178,"categories":179,"keywords":180,"publishedAt":39},"01M6HPF6JS9X72WP59094H3ASQ","triaging-security-incident","Performs initial triage of security incidents to determine severity, scope, and required response actions using the NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks. Classifies incidents by type, assigns priority based on business impact, and routes...","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Ftriaging-security-incident\u002FSKILL.md",[],[181,182,146,30,183,184,23,28,143,185,186,187,188,189,190,191,192,193,194,195],"security","triaging security incident","actions","soc","analysis","severity-classification","incident-triage","SANS-PICERL","SOC-operations","picerl","conversion","isolation","scope","impact","consistency",{"skillNo":197,"name":198,"nameZh":6,"description":199,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":200,"categories":201,"keywords":202,"publishedAt":39},"01M6HPF2EX6ZYNYYHKBRJN7GEF","triaging-security-incident-with-ir-playbook","Classify and prioritize security incidents using structured IR playbooks to determine severity, assign response teams, and initiate appropriate response procedures.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Ftriaging-security-incident-with-ir-playbook\u002FSKILL.md",[],[181,203,204,182,146,160,30,205,184,140,206,207,28,143,208,186,169,209,210,211],"playbook","triaging security incident with ir playbook","teams","IR-playbook","severity","classification","classify","incidents","initiate",{"skillNo":213,"name":214,"nameZh":6,"description":215,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":216,"categories":217,"keywords":218,"publishedAt":39},"01M6HPEY9XPGE7X95AG4XJFQAW","triaging-security-alerts-in-splunk","Triages security alerts in Splunk Enterprise Security by classifying severity, investigating notable events, correlating related telemetry, and making escalation or closure decisions using SPL queries and the Incident Review dashboard. Use when...","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Ftriaging-security-alerts-in-splunk\u002FSKILL.md",[],[181,219,220,221,222,223,30,224,225,226,184,227,28,228,229,230,189,231,146,232],"security alerts","splunk","triaging security alerts in splunk","alerts","review","siem","dashboard","search","correlation-search","t1566","notable-events","incident-review","cm","de",{"skillNo":234,"name":235,"nameZh":6,"description":236,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":237,"categories":238,"keywords":239,"publishedAt":39},"01M6HPET6XGEPEJPN7V032JGZ0","tracking-threat-actor-infrastructure","Threat actor infrastructure tracking involves monitoring and mapping adversary-controlled assets including command-and-control (C2) servers, phishing domains, exploit kit hosts, bulletproof hosting, a","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHenriqueMC17\u002Fagente-core\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fmodules\u002Ftracking-threat-actor-infrastructure\u002FSKILL.md",[],[240,241,242,243,30,244,245,246,247,248,249,228,250,251,231,252,232,253,254,255],"infrastructure","tracking threat actor infrastructure","tracking","threat","monitoring","mitre-attack","threat-actor","threat-intelligence","command-and-control","dns","command","exploit","intelligence","domains","kit","hosts"]