SECURITY REVIEW
Not yet assessed
Review the original instructions and requested permissions before installing.
No security review is available for this catalog entry yet.
Hack23 Information Security Policy integration for SDLC — developer-facing mapping of ISP requirements to daily engineering activities, tooling, and evidence
Review the original instructions and requested permissions before installing.
No security review is available for this catalog entry yet.
How clearly the skill guides your agent, how complete its workflow is, and how you can check the outcome.
No quality assessment is available for this catalog entry yet.
Original instructions from the publisher’s SKILL.md
# Hack23 Information Security Policy Integration Skill ## Purpose Translate the [Hack23 Information Security Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Information_Security_Policy.md) — the **apex** document of the Hack23 ISMS — into concrete, enforceable engineering behaviour for the CIA platform. This skill connects the high-level policy (CIA triad objectives, risk appetite, roles, legal duties) to the code, workflows, reviews, and evidence that actually implement it. Where `hack23-isms-compliance` describes the **framework** and `information-security-strategy` describes the **strategy**, this skill tells an engineer or AI agent *"given the ISP and its supporting policies, what must I do in this commit, PR, or design?"* ## When to Use Apply this skill when: - ✅ Starting or reviewing any code / infrastructure / documentation change that touches data, authentication, authorization, crypto, logging, or third-party integrations - ✅ Creating or updating a GitHub issue or PR that is security-relevant - ✅ Onboarding a new contributor, AI agent, or repository to Hack23 standards - ✅ Responding to a CodeQL / SonarCloud / OWASP / Dependabot finding - ✅ Classifying data, designing an API, or integrating an external source - ✅ Preparing release notes, SBOM, SECURITY.md, or audit evidence - ✅ Assessing whether an AI coding agent action is policy-compliant Do NOT use for: - ❌ Tactical incident response (use `incident-response` skill) - ❌ Deep cryptographic implementation (use `crypto-best-practices` / `cryptography-policy`) - ❌ Framework-level compliance mapping only (use `hack23-isms-compliance`) ## Information Security Policy — Core Tenets (Engineering View) The ISP is binding on all contributors, including AI agents. Its five engineering-relevant tenets are: | # | ISP Tenet | What it means in code/PRs | Primary Evidence | |---|-----------|---------------------------|------------------| | 1 | **Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability (CIA triad)** | Every change must preserve or strengthen C/I/A for affected assets; no change may silently lower a classification control. | THREAT_MODEL.md, SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md, classification labels | | 2 | **Risk-based, defence-in-depth** | Controls at code, platform, CI, infra, and monitoring layers; no single point of failure. | SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md, Risk Register, ZAP/CodeQL scans | | 3 | **Least privilege & segregation of duties** | Minimum IAM, minimum token scopes, CODEOWNERS review, `permissions:` block on every workflow. | `.github/workflows/*`, GitHub branch protection, IAM policies | | 4 | **Transparency & accountability** | Signed commits, public security docs, SBOM, OpenSSF/CII badges, auditable logs. | OpenSSF Scorecard, CII badge, SECURITY.md, SBOM | | 5 | **Legal & regulatory alignment** | GDPR, NIS2, EU CRA, ISO 27001:2022, NIST CSF 2.0, CIS v8. | `CRA-ASSESSMENT.md`, `ISMS_COMPLIANCE_MAPPING.md`, DPIA | ## Supporting Policies and When Each Applies The ISP is implemented through these supporting policies. An AI agent or developer MUST consult the ones that apply to the task at hand. | Policy | Applies When | Key Engineering Checks | |--------|--------------|------------------------| | [Secure Development Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Secure_Development_Policy.md) | Any code or build change | SAST+DAST+SCA pass, banned patterns, signed commits | | [Open Source Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Open_Source_Policy.md) | Public repos, OSS dep changes, release | OpenSSF ≥7.0, CII Passing, SLSA 3, FOSSA pass, SBOM attached | | [Secrets Management Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Secrets_Management_Policy.md) | Any credential, token, key, env var | No secrets in code, GitHub Secrets/SSM, rotation, scanning enabled | | [Cryptography Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Cryptography_Policy.md) | TLS, hashing, encryption, signing | TLS 1.3, AES-256-GCM, bcrypt/argon2, RSA-4096/EC P-384, KMS-managed keys | | [Access Control Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Access_Control_Policy.md) | AuthN/AuthZ, Spring Security, IAM | Least privilege, MFA, role separation, deny-by-default | | [Data Classification / CLASSIFICATION](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/CLASSIFICATION.md) | New entity, API, log, export | Correct C/I/A label, handling controls per level | | [Data Protection Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Data_Protection_Policy.md) | Personal data, retention, export | GDPR lawful basis, retention, DSAR support | | [Privacy Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Privacy_Policy.md) | Any UI, log, analytics touching users | Minimal data, consent, cookies, opt-out paths | | [Vulnerability Management](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Vulnerability_Management.md) | Any finding from scanners | SLA: Crit 24h/7d, High 7d, Med 30d, Low 90d | | [Change Management](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Change_Management.md) | Releases, schema migrations, infra | CAB review, rollback plan, migration changeset | | [Backup & Recovery](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Backup_Recovery_Policy.md) | DB or state change, DR tests | RPO/RTO respected, restore tested | | [Incident Response Plan](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Incident_Response_Plan.md) | Suspected breach, outage, data loss | Ticket, classify, contain, notify ≤72h GDPR | | [Threat Modeling](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Threat_Modeling.md) | New feature, API, trust boundary | STRIDE, attack tree, mitigation mapping | | [Third Party Management](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Third_Party_Management.md) | New dependency, API, vendor, SaaS | License OK, CVE clean, data-sharing justified | | [Segregation of Duties](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Segregation_of_Duties_Policy.md) | Workflow, deployment, review config | Author ≠ approver, CODEOWNERS enforced | | [AI Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/AI_Policy.md) | Any AI / Copilot / agent action | EU AI Act risk-tier, OWASP LLM, human-in-the-loop | | [Information Security Strategy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Information_Security_Strategy.md) | Roadmap, architecture decisions | Aligned with CEO-approved risk appetite | ## SDLC × ISP Responsibility Matrix Each phase has mandatory ISP-derived checks. AI agents must confirm all items for their phase before proceeding. ``` ┌────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ SDLC Phase │ ISP-Derived Gate │ ├────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ Plan │ Classification set; threat model updated; DPIA if needed │ │ Design │ Least privilege; trust boundaries; crypto choices per │ │ │ Cryptography Policy; third-party review │ │ Implement │ Banned patterns avoided; input validation; output │ │ │ encoding; parameterized queries; no secrets │ │ Review │ CODEOWNERS; SoD (author ≠ approver); PR template met │ │ Build │ Pinned actions; reproducible; signed; SBOM generated │ │ Test │ ≥80% line / ≥70% branch; CodeQL + SCA pass; DAST │ │ │ baseline; negative test cases │ │ Release │ Signed artifacts; SLSA provenance; release notes; │ │ │ security advisories closed │ │ Operate │ Logging (no PII); alerting; rotation; DR test │ │ Respond │ Incident plan triggers; 72h GDPR notification path │ │ Retire │ Secure data deletion; key destruction; dep removal │ └────────────────┴──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ ``` ## Non-Negotiable Rules (from ISP §Acceptable Use / §Secure Engineering) 🔴 **Never**: - Commit secrets, tokens, keys, or personal data — use GitHub Secrets / AWS SSM - Disable a security control (CSRF, CSP, TLS, CodeQL) without a risk-accepted PR + CEO sign-off - Introduce a dependency without vulnerability + license check - Bypass CODEOWNERS, branch protection, or the signed-commit requirement - Log request bodies, tokens, passwords, or classified data - Ship a release with open Critical or High CVEs - Use an unpinned GitHub Action in a workflow that has write permissions - Process personal data without a lawful basis documented in the DPIA 🟢 **Always**: - Classify new data (`Public / Internal / Confidential / Restricted`) - Default to deny in authorization checks - Parameterize all database queries - Encode output at the rendering boundary (Vaadin `ContentMode.TEXT`) - Use `@Transactional` with explicit boundaries; `readOnly = true` where applicable - Add unit tests for the negative / unauthorized path - Sign commits (GPG or SSH) and releases (Sigstore/cosign) - Record security-relevant decisions in SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md / THREAT_MODEL.md ## AI Agent & Copilot Guardrails (ISP + AI Policy) These rules bind every AI agent (task-agent, stack-specialist, etc.) operating in this repo: 1. **Read before act** — load README, copilot-instructions, and the ISP before making changes 2. **Classification awareness** — never escalate Public → Confidential exposure inadvertently 3. **Minimal diff** — surgical, auditable changes; no unrelated refactors 4. **Evidence first** — every security claim cites scanner output, ISMS control, or test 5. **Human-in-the-loop** — Critical/High security changes require human approval before merge 6. **Transparent reasoning** — PR descriptions link to ISP / supporting policy when relevant 7. **No secret handling** — agents never print, commit, or send secrets; only reference names ## PR Policy Compliance Checklist Paste into PR description for any security-relevant change: ``` ### ISP & Supporting Policy Compliance - [ ] Change scope and classification documented - [ ] Threat model impact assessed (STRIDE) or confirmed N/A - [ ] Secure Development Policy checks pass (CodeQL, SonarCloud, OWASP, SpotBugs) - [ ] Secrets Management Policy respected (no secrets, rotation considered) - [ ] Cryptography Policy respected (approved algorithms, key storage) - [ ] Access Control Policy respected (least privilege, deny-by-default) - [ ] Data Protection / Privacy Policy respected (GDPR basis, retention) - [ ] Third Party Management respected (license, CVE, attribution) - [ ] Open Source Policy respected (SBOM, signed release, badges) - [ ] Logging reviewed (no PII, no secrets, useful for IR) - [ ] Negative-path tests added - [ ] SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md / THREAT_MODEL.md updated if needed ``` ## Evidence & Audit Trail Every security claim is backed by machine-verifiable evidence: | Claim | Evidence | |-------|----------| | "Least privilege in CI" | `permissions:` block in workflow YAML | | "No critical CVEs" | OWASP Dependency Check report, Dependabot status | | "Signed releases" | Sigstore attestation, GitHub Release signatures | | "Reproducible build" | SLSA provenance attestation | | "Coverage ≥80%" | JaCoCo report in SonarCloud | | "No known security hotspots" | SonarCloud Security Hotspot review | | "License compliant" | FOSSA status badge, LICENSES/ directory | | "SBOM complete" | CycloneDX `target/bom.json` attached to release | ## ISMS Framework Mapping | ISP Tenet | ISO 27001:2022 | NIST CSF 2.0 | CIS v8 | |-----------|----------------|--------------|--------| | CIA Triad | A.5.1, A.8.2 | GV.RM, PR.DS | CIS 3 | | Defence-in-depth | A.8.16, A.8.26 | PR.IP, DE.CM | CIS 4, 13 | | Least privilege | A.5.15, A.8.2, A.8.3 | PR.AC-4 | CIS 6 | | Transparency | A.5.31, A.5.37 | GV.OC, ID.GV | CIS 17 | | Legal alignment | A.5.31–A.5.36 | GV.OC-03 | CIS 17.1 | ## References - [Information Security Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Information_Security_Policy.md) — apex policy - [All Hack23 ISMS Policies](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC) - [Secure Development Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Secure_Development_Policy.md) - [Open Source Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Open_Source_Policy.md) - [Information Security Strategy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/Information_Security_Strategy.md) - [AI Policy](https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC/blob/main/AI_Policy.md) - Related skills: `hack23-isms-compliance`, `information-security-strategy`, `secure-development-policy`, `open-source-policy`, `compliance-frameworks`