Claude Skill

incident-response

Runs a security incident from detection to closure — triage, containment, investigation, communication, and the review afterward. Use this when a compromise is suspected or confirmed, when preparing an incident response plan or running an exercise, when deciding whether something

LLM Mart · 0 points · 16 views 0 listing impressions 0 install-command copies
Virus-scanned Reviewed automatically before listing.

Full trust report

Download cbrock84-headcount-plugins_security_skills_incident-response-98d1c17.zip · 3 KB
Part of cbrock84/headcount — 160 skills

Install

skills CLI npx skills add https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/security/skills/incident-response
Claude Code claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install cbrock84-headcount@llmmart
Git git clone https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git

The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole cbrock84/headcount collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.

Skill manifest

Incident response

Breach notification runs on statutory clocks, measured in hours in several regimes. Involve Legal & Risk and qualified counsel as soon as personal data may be involved — not after the technical work is done.

Decide it is an incident, and say so

The most expensive delay is the hour spent debating whether this is really an incident. Declare early; standing down a declared incident is cheap, and discovering an hour late that it was real is not.

Name an incident commander immediately. One person, coordinating, not doing the technical work. Everyone else has a defined job. Incidents fail on coordination far more than on technical capability.

Order of operations

1. Contain before investigating. Stop the bleeding: isolate the host, revoke the credential, disable the account, block the path. It is tempting to watch the attacker to learn more — do that only with a deliberate decision, not by default.

2. Preserve evidence while containing. Snapshot before you rebuild. Capture volatile state — memory, connections, running processes — before powering anything off. Rebuilding a compromised host destroys the only record of how they got in, and you will need it.

3. Establish scope. What was accessed, what was taken, when it started, and whether it is still happening. Assume the initial scope is understated; it usually is. Look for persistence and lateral movement before declaring containment.

4. Eradicate and recover. Remove the access, close the path, then restore. Rebuild from known good rather than cleaning in place — you cannot prove a cleaned host is clean.

Rotate every credential the attacker could have reached, not only the ones you know they used.

5. Watch after recovery. Re-entry is common. Monitor specifically for the path they used and its neighbors.

Communication

Keep one timeline as the single source of truth, updated as facts are established, with each entry timestamped and attributed. Incidents generate contradictory information at speed, and the timeline is what stops the same question being answered three ways.

Say what is known, what is not yet known, and when the next update comes. Never speculate on cause or scope externally before it is established — a retracted statement extends the story and damages credibility more than the incident did.

Afterward

Blameless review, focused on the system rather than the person. The useful questions: how could this have been detected sooner, what made containment slow, what did we not have that we needed, and what made this possible in the first place.

Output actions with owners and dates. A review producing no committed changes is theater, and the same incident recurs.

Preparation

The plan matters less than having run it. Exercise once a year at minimum: a tabletop against a realistic scenario finds the gaps — who has authority out of hours, where the credentials are, who calls counsel — at a time when finding them is free.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Never

  • Rebuild or wipe a compromised host before evidence is captured.
  • Let the person running the technical response also own external communication.
  • Close an incident before you can say how entry happened and that the path is shut.
  • Speculate about cause or attribution outside the response channel while the incident is open.
Files (headcount)
  • references
    • sources.md 1.7 KB
      # Sources — `security:incident-response`
      
      <!-- Generated by scripts/build-sources.py from sources/*.toml. Do not edit. -->
      
      Check these before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. The use note on each one is binding: most of what a professional cites is free to read and not free to reproduce.
      
      ## CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog
      
      CISA · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>
      
      Machine-readable: <https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/feeds/known_exploited_vulnerabilities.json>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Which vulnerabilities are being exploited in the wild right now — the only list that reliably separates patch-this-week from patch-this-quarter.
      
      ## MITRE ATT&CK
      
      The MITRE Corporation · global · free to use with attribution — credit the publisher
      
      <https://attack.mitre.org/>
      
      Machine-readable: <https://github.com/mitre-attack/attack-stix-data>
      
      **Authoritative for:** The shared vocabulary for adversary tactics and techniques — what to name a behavior so a detection, a threat model and an incident report refer to the same thing.
      
      ## NIST SP 800-61: Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations
      
      NIST · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/61/r3/final>
      
      **Authoritative for:** What an incident response capability must contain and what evidence must be captured at each stage. The current revision is a substantial rewrite that drops the older four-phase framing, so do not mix guidance across revisions.
      
      ---
      
      Sources are maintained in `sources/` upstream, not here. If one is wrong, out of date, or missing, fix it there — this file is regenerated and an edit to it is lost.
      
  • SKILL.md 4 KB
    ---
    name: incident-response
    description: Runs a security incident from detection to closure — triage, containment, investigation, communication, and the review afterward. Use this when a compromise is suspected or confirmed, when preparing an incident response plan or running an exercise, when deciding whether something is an incident, or when a breach may trigger notification obligations.
    ---
    
    # Incident response
    
    > Breach notification runs on statutory clocks, measured in hours in several regimes. Involve Legal
    > & Risk and qualified counsel as soon as personal data may be involved — not after the technical
    > work is done.
    
    ## Decide it is an incident, and say so
    
    The most expensive delay is the hour spent debating whether this is really an incident. Declare
    early; standing down a declared incident is cheap, and discovering an hour late that it was real is
    not.
    
    Name an **incident commander** immediately. One person, coordinating, not doing the technical work.
    Everyone else has a defined job. Incidents fail on coordination far more than on technical
    capability.
    
    ## Order of operations
    
    **1. Contain before investigating.** Stop the bleeding: isolate the host, revoke the credential,
    disable the account, block the path. It is tempting to watch the attacker to learn more — do that
    only with a deliberate decision, not by default.
    
    **2. Preserve evidence while containing.** Snapshot before you rebuild. Capture volatile state —
    memory, connections, running processes — before powering anything off. Rebuilding a compromised host
    destroys the only record of how they got in, and you will need it.
    
    **3. Establish scope.** What was accessed, what was taken, when it started, and whether it is still
    happening. Assume the initial scope is understated; it usually is. Look for persistence and lateral
    movement before declaring containment.
    
    **4. Eradicate and recover.** Remove the access, close the path, then restore. Rebuild from known
    good rather than cleaning in place — you cannot prove a cleaned host is clean.
    
    Rotate every credential the attacker could have reached, not only the ones you know they used.
    
    **5. Watch after recovery.** Re-entry is common. Monitor specifically for the path they used and its
    neighbors.
    
    ## Communication
    
    Keep one timeline as the single source of truth, updated as facts are established, with each entry
    timestamped and attributed. Incidents generate contradictory information at speed, and the timeline
    is what stops the same question being answered three ways.
    
    Say what is known, what is not yet known, and when the next update comes. Never speculate on cause
    or scope externally before it is established — a retracted statement extends the story and damages
    credibility more than the incident did.
    
    ## Afterward
    
    Blameless review, focused on the system rather than the person. The useful questions: how could this
    have been detected sooner, what made containment slow, what did we not have that we needed, and what
    made this possible in the first place.
    
    Output actions with owners and dates. A review producing no committed changes is theater, and the
    same incident recurs.
    
    ## Preparation
    
    The plan matters less than having run it. Exercise once a year at minimum: a tabletop against a
    realistic scenario finds the gaps — who has authority out of hours, where the credentials are, who
    calls counsel — at a time when finding them is free.
    
    ## Sources
    
    `references/sources.md` in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions
    here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before
    answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free
    to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.
    
    ## Never
    
    - Rebuild or wipe a compromised host before evidence is captured.
    - Let the person running the technical response also own external communication.
    - Close an incident before you can say how entry happened and that the path is shut.
    - Speculate about cause or attribution outside the response channel while the incident is open.
    

Comments (0)

Sign in to join the conversation.

No comments yet.

Reviews (0)

No reviews yet.

Related