[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6ADZ8EMFYYSPPJQR0RDTR74":3,"skill-same:01M6ADZ8EMFYYSPPJQR0RDTR74":129},{"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":29,"publishedAt":50,"linkOnly":51,"markdownContent":52,"markdownBody":53,"frontMatter":54,"refName":70,"commitSha":71,"skillDirectory":72,"forksCount":73,"repositoryHtmlUrl":74,"repositoryHomepageUrl":75,"ownerHtmlUrl":76,"ownerBlogUrl":77,"ownerDescription":78,"updatedAt":79,"install":80,"resources":93},"01M6ADZ8EMFYYSPPJQR0RDTR74","building-patch-tuesday-response-process",null,"Establish a repeatable operational process for triaging, testing, and deploying Microsoft Patch Tuesday security updates (Windows, Office, Exchange, SQL Server, Azure) via WSUS\u002FSCCM within risk-based remediation SLAs, from advisory review through validation. Use when building or improving a monthly patch management workflow or prioritizing which CVEs to remediate first.","mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills","mukul975","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F42860185?v=4","01M6ADEQR8T5M4EEG6C67BQCWF","Mahipal","01M6ADJPMYWG1E5GM1FWBE3128",36078,"Apache-2.0","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002FSKILL.md",[18,23,26],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量","SCENARIO","使用场景",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000010","后端与接口",{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发",[30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49],"building patch tuesday response process","validation","windows-update","vulnerability-remediation","sccm","wsus","patch-tuesday","patch-management","office","server","testing","update","azure","sql server","sql","windows","microsoft","workflow","cybersecurity","review","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: building-patch-tuesday-response-process\ndescription: Establish a repeatable operational process for triaging, testing, and\n  deploying Microsoft Patch Tuesday security updates (Windows, Office, Exchange, SQL\n  Server, Azure) via WSUS\u002FSCCM within risk-based remediation SLAs, from advisory review\n  through validation. Use when building or improving a monthly patch management workflow\n  or prioritizing which CVEs to remediate first.\ndomain: cybersecurity\nsubdomain: vulnerability-management\ntags:\n- patch-management\n- patch-tuesday\n- microsoft\n- wsus\n- sccm\n- vulnerability-remediation\n- windows-update\nversion: '1.0'\nauthor: mahipal\nlicense: Apache-2.0\nnist_csf:\n- ID.RA-01\n- ID.RA-02\n- ID.IM-02\n- ID.RA-06\nmitre_attack:\n- T1190\n- T1203\n- T1068\n- T1210\n- T1588.006\n---\n# Building Patch Tuesday Response Process\n\n## Overview\nMicrosoft releases security updates on the second Tuesday of each month (\"Patch Tuesday\"), addressing vulnerabilities across Windows, Office, Exchange, SQL Server, Azure services, and other products. In 2025, Microsoft patched over 1,129 vulnerabilities across the year -- an 11.9% increase from 2024 -- making a structured response process critical. The leading risk types include elevation of privilege (49%), remote code execution (34%), and information disclosure (7%). This skill covers building a repeatable Patch Tuesday response workflow from initial advisory review through testing, deployment, and validation.\n\n\n## When to Use\n\n- When deploying or configuring building patch tuesday response process capabilities in your environment\n- When establishing security controls aligned to compliance requirements\n- When building or improving security architecture for this domain\n- When conducting security assessments that require this implementation\n\n## Prerequisites\n- Access to Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC) update guide\n- Vulnerability management platform (Qualys VMDR, Rapid7, Tenable)\n- Patch deployment infrastructure (WSUS, SCCM\u002FMECM, Intune, or third-party)\n- Test environment mirroring production configurations\n- Change management process (ITIL-based or equivalent)\n- Communication channels for cross-team coordination\n\n## Core Concepts\n\n### Patch Tuesday Timeline\n\n| Day | Activity | Owner |\n|-----|----------|-------|\n| T+0 (Tuesday 10 AM PT) | Microsoft releases patches and advisories | Microsoft |\n| T+0 (Tuesday afternoon) | Security team reviews advisories and triages | Security Ops |\n| T+1 (Wednesday) | Qualys\u002Fvendor scan signatures updated | VM Platform |\n| T+1-T+2 | Emergency patches deployed for zero-days | IT Operations |\n| T+2-T+5 | Test patches in staging environment | QA\u002FIT Ops |\n| T+5-T+7 | Deploy to Pilot group (5-10% of fleet) | IT Operations |\n| T+7-T+14 | Deploy to Production Ring 1 (servers) | IT Operations |\n| T+14-T+21 | Deploy to Production Ring 2 (workstations) | IT Operations |\n| T+21-T+30 | Validation scanning and compliance reporting | Security Ops |\n\n### Patch Categorization Framework\n\n| Category | Criteria | Response SLA |\n|----------|----------|-------------|\n| Zero-Day \u002F Exploited | Active exploitation confirmed, CISA KEV listed | 24-48 hours |\n| Critical RCE | CVSS >= 9.0, remote code execution, no auth required | 3-5 days |\n| Critical with Exploit | Public exploit code or EPSS > 0.7 | 7 days |\n| High Severity | CVSS 7.0-8.9, privilege escalation | 14 days |\n| Medium Severity | CVSS 4.0-6.9 | 30 days |\n| Low \u002F Informational | CVSS \u003C 4.0, defense-in-depth | Next maintenance window |\n\n### Microsoft Product Categories to Monitor\n\n| Category | Products | Risk Level |\n|----------|----------|------------|\n| Windows OS | Windows 10, 11, Server 2016-2025 | Critical |\n| Exchange Server | Exchange 2016, 2019, Online | Critical |\n| SQL Server | SQL 2016-2022 | High |\n| Office Suite | Microsoft 365, Office 2019-2024 | High |\n| .NET Framework | .NET 4.x, .NET 6-9 | Medium |\n| Azure Services | Azure AD, Entra ID, Azure Stack | High |\n| Edge\u002FBrowser | Edge Chromium, IE mode | Medium |\n| Development Tools | Visual Studio, VS Code | Low |\n\n## Workflow\n\n### Step 1: Pre-Patch Tuesday Preparation (Monday before)\n```\nPreparation Checklist:\n  [ ] Confirm WSUS\u002FSCCM sync schedules are active\n  [ ] Verify test environment is available and current\n  [ ] Review outstanding patches from previous month\n  [ ] Confirm monitoring dashboards are operational\n  [ ] Pre-stage communication templates\n  [ ] Ensure rollback procedures are documented\n  [ ] Verify backup jobs ran successfully on critical servers\n```\n\n### Step 2: Day-of Triage (Patch Tuesday)\n\n```\nTriage Process:\n  1. Monitor MSRC Update Guide (https:\u002F\u002Fmsrc.microsoft.com\u002Fupdate-guide)\n  2. Review Microsoft Security Blog for advisory summaries\n  3. Cross-reference with CISA KEV additions (same day)\n  4. Check vendor advisories (Qualys, Rapid7, CrowdStrike analysis)\n  5. Identify zero-day and actively exploited vulnerabilities\n  6. Classify each CVE by severity and applicability\n  7. Determine deployment rings and timeline for each patch\n  8. Submit emergency change request for zero-day patches\n  9. Communicate triage results to IT Operations and management\n```\n\n### Step 3: Scan and Gap Analysis\n\n```python\n# Post-Patch-Tuesday scan workflow\ndef run_patch_tuesday_scan(scanner_api, target_groups):\n    \"\"\"Trigger vulnerability scans after Patch Tuesday updates.\"\"\"\n    for group in target_groups:\n        print(f\"[*] Scanning {group['name']}...\")\n        scan_id = scanner_api.launch_scan(\n            target=group[\"targets\"],\n            template=\"patch-tuesday-focused\",\n            credentials=group[\"creds\"]\n        )\n        print(f\"    Scan launched: {scan_id}\")\n\n    # Wait for scan completion, then generate report\n    results = scanner_api.get_scan_results(scan_id)\n    missing_patches = [r for r in results if r[\"status\"] == \"missing\"]\n\n    # Categorize by Patch Tuesday release\n    current_month = [p for p in missing_patches\n                     if p[\"vendor_advisory_date\"] >= patch_tuesday_date]\n\n    return {\n        \"total_missing\": len(missing_patches),\n        \"current_month\": len(current_month),\n        \"zero_day\": [p for p in current_month if p.get(\"actively_exploited\")],\n        \"critical\": [p for p in current_month if p[\"cvss\"] >= 9.0],\n    }\n```\n\n### Step 4: Ring-Based Deployment Strategy\n\n```\nRing 0 - Emergency (0-48 hours):\n    Scope:     Zero-day and actively exploited CVEs only\n    Method:    Manual or targeted push (SCCM expedite)\n    Targets:   Internet-facing servers, critical infrastructure\n    Approval:  Emergency change, verbal CISO approval\n    Rollback:  Immediate rollback if service degradation\n\nRing 1 - Pilot (Day 2-7):\n    Scope:     All critical and high patches\n    Method:    WSUS\u002FSCCM automatic deployment\n    Targets:   IT department machines, test group (5-10%)\n    Approval:  Standard change with CAB notification\n    Monitoring: 48-hour soak period, check for BSOD, app crashes\n\nRing 2 - Production Servers (Day 7-14):\n    Scope:     All security patches\n    Method:    SCCM maintenance windows (off-hours)\n    Targets:   Production servers by tier\n    Approval:  Standard change with CAB approval\n    Monitoring: Application health checks, performance baseline\n\nRing 3 - Workstations (Day 14-21):\n    Scope:     All security patches + quality updates\n    Method:    Windows Update for Business \u002F Intune\n    Targets:   All managed workstations\n    Approval:  Pre-approved standard change\n    Monitoring: Help desk ticket monitoring for issues\n\nRing 4 - Stragglers (Day 21-30):\n    Scope:     Catch remaining unpatched systems\n    Method:    Forced deployment with restart\n    Targets:   Systems that missed prior rings\n    Approval:  Compliance-driven enforcement\n```\n\n### Step 5: Validation and Reporting\n\n```\nPost-Deployment Validation:\n  1. Re-scan environment with updated vulnerability signatures\n  2. Compare pre-patch and post-patch scan results\n  3. Calculate patch compliance rate per ring and department\n  4. Identify failed patches and investigate root causes\n  5. Generate compliance report for management review\n  6. Update risk register with residual unpatched vulnerabilities\n  7. Document exceptions and compensating controls\n```\n\n## Best Practices\n1. Subscribe to MSRC notifications and vendor analysis blogs for early intelligence\n2. Maintain a dedicated Patch Tuesday war room or Slack\u002FTeams channel\n3. Always patch zero-day vulnerabilities outside the normal ring schedule\n4. Test patches against critical business applications before broad deployment\n5. Track patch compliance metrics month-over-month for trend analysis\n6. Maintain rollback procedures for every deployment ring\n7. Coordinate with application owners for compatibility testing\n8. Document all exceptions with compensating controls and review dates\n\n## Common Pitfalls\n- Deploying all patches simultaneously without ring-based testing\n- Not scanning after patching to validate remediation\n- Treating all patches equally without risk-based prioritization\n- Ignoring cumulative update dependencies causing patch failures\n- Not accounting for server reboot requirements in maintenance windows\n- Failing to communicate patch status to business stakeholders\n\n## Related Skills\n- implementing-rapid7-insightvm-for-scanning\n- performing-cve-prioritization-with-kev-catalog\n- implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla\n- implementing-patch-management-workflow\n","# Building Patch Tuesday Response Process\n\n## Overview\nMicrosoft releases security updates on the second Tuesday of each month (\"Patch Tuesday\"), addressing vulnerabilities across Windows, Office, Exchange, SQL Server, Azure services, and other products. In 2025, Microsoft patched over 1,129 vulnerabilities across the year -- an 11.9% increase from 2024 -- making a structured response process critical. The leading risk types include elevation of privilege (49%), remote code execution (34%), and information disclosure (7%). This skill covers building a repeatable Patch Tuesday response workflow from initial advisory review through testing, deployment, and validation.\n\n\n## When to Use\n\n- When deploying or configuring building patch tuesday response process capabilities in your environment\n- When establishing security controls aligned to compliance requirements\n- When building or improving security architecture for this domain\n- When conducting security assessments that require this implementation\n\n## Prerequisites\n- Access to Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC) update guide\n- Vulnerability management platform (Qualys VMDR, Rapid7, Tenable)\n- Patch deployment infrastructure (WSUS, SCCM\u002FMECM, Intune, or third-party)\n- Test environment mirroring production configurations\n- Change management process (ITIL-based or equivalent)\n- Communication channels for cross-team coordination\n\n## Core Concepts\n\n### Patch Tuesday Timeline\n\n| Day | Activity | Owner |\n|-----|----------|-------|\n| T+0 (Tuesday 10 AM PT) | Microsoft releases patches and advisories | Microsoft |\n| T+0 (Tuesday afternoon) | Security team reviews advisories and triages | Security Ops |\n| T+1 (Wednesday) | Qualys\u002Fvendor scan signatures updated | VM Platform |\n| T+1-T+2 | Emergency patches deployed for zero-days | IT Operations |\n| T+2-T+5 | Test patches in staging environment | QA\u002FIT Ops |\n| T+5-T+7 | Deploy to Pilot group (5-10% of fleet) | IT Operations |\n| T+7-T+14 | Deploy to Production Ring 1 (servers) | IT Operations |\n| T+14-T+21 | Deploy to Production Ring 2 (workstations) | IT Operations |\n| T+21-T+30 | Validation scanning and compliance reporting | Security Ops |\n\n### Patch Categorization Framework\n\n| Category | Criteria | Response SLA |\n|----------|----------|-------------|\n| Zero-Day \u002F Exploited | Active exploitation confirmed, CISA KEV listed | 24-48 hours |\n| Critical RCE | CVSS >= 9.0, remote code execution, no auth required | 3-5 days |\n| Critical with Exploit | Public exploit code or EPSS > 0.7 | 7 days |\n| High Severity | CVSS 7.0-8.9, privilege escalation | 14 days |\n| Medium Severity | CVSS 4.0-6.9 | 30 days |\n| Low \u002F Informational | CVSS \u003C 4.0, defense-in-depth | Next maintenance window |\n\n### Microsoft Product Categories to Monitor\n\n| Category | Products | Risk Level |\n|----------|----------|------------|\n| Windows OS | Windows 10, 11, Server 2016-2025 | Critical |\n| Exchange Server | Exchange 2016, 2019, Online | Critical |\n| SQL Server | SQL 2016-2022 | High |\n| Office Suite | Microsoft 365, Office 2019-2024 | High |\n| .NET Framework | .NET 4.x, .NET 6-9 | Medium |\n| Azure Services | Azure AD, Entra ID, Azure Stack | High |\n| Edge\u002FBrowser | Edge Chromium, IE mode | Medium |\n| Development Tools | Visual Studio, VS Code | Low |\n\n## Workflow\n\n### Step 1: Pre-Patch Tuesday Preparation (Monday before)\n```\nPreparation Checklist:\n  [ ] Confirm WSUS\u002FSCCM sync schedules are active\n  [ ] Verify test environment is available and current\n  [ ] Review outstanding patches from previous month\n  [ ] Confirm monitoring dashboards are operational\n  [ ] Pre-stage communication templates\n  [ ] Ensure rollback procedures are documented\n  [ ] Verify backup jobs ran successfully on critical servers\n```\n\n### Step 2: Day-of Triage (Patch Tuesday)\n\n```\nTriage Process:\n  1. Monitor MSRC Update Guide (https:\u002F\u002Fmsrc.microsoft.com\u002Fupdate-guide)\n  2. Review Microsoft Security Blog for advisory summaries\n  3. Cross-reference with CISA KEV additions (same day)\n  4. Check vendor advisories (Qualys, Rapid7, CrowdStrike analysis)\n  5. Identify zero-day and actively exploited vulnerabilities\n  6. Classify each CVE by severity and applicability\n  7. Determine deployment rings and timeline for each patch\n  8. Submit emergency change request for zero-day patches\n  9. Communicate triage results to IT Operations and management\n```\n\n### Step 3: Scan and Gap Analysis\n\n```python\n# Post-Patch-Tuesday scan workflow\ndef run_patch_tuesday_scan(scanner_api, target_groups):\n    \"\"\"Trigger vulnerability scans after Patch Tuesday updates.\"\"\"\n    for group in target_groups:\n        print(f\"[*] Scanning {group['name']}...\")\n        scan_id = scanner_api.launch_scan(\n            target=group[\"targets\"],\n            template=\"patch-tuesday-focused\",\n            credentials=group[\"creds\"]\n        )\n        print(f\"    Scan launched: {scan_id}\")\n\n    # Wait for scan completion, then generate report\n    results = scanner_api.get_scan_results(scan_id)\n    missing_patches = [r for r in results if r[\"status\"] == \"missing\"]\n\n    # Categorize by Patch Tuesday release\n    current_month = [p for p in missing_patches\n                     if p[\"vendor_advisory_date\"] >= patch_tuesday_date]\n\n    return {\n        \"total_missing\": len(missing_patches),\n        \"current_month\": len(current_month),\n        \"zero_day\": [p for p in current_month if p.get(\"actively_exploited\")],\n        \"critical\": [p for p in current_month if p[\"cvss\"] >= 9.0],\n    }\n```\n\n### Step 4: Ring-Based Deployment Strategy\n\n```\nRing 0 - Emergency (0-48 hours):\n    Scope:     Zero-day and actively exploited CVEs only\n    Method:    Manual or targeted push (SCCM expedite)\n    Targets:   Internet-facing servers, critical infrastructure\n    Approval:  Emergency change, verbal CISO approval\n    Rollback:  Immediate rollback if service degradation\n\nRing 1 - Pilot (Day 2-7):\n    Scope:     All critical and high patches\n    Method:    WSUS\u002FSCCM automatic deployment\n    Targets:   IT department machines, test group (5-10%)\n    Approval:  Standard change with CAB notification\n    Monitoring: 48-hour soak period, check for BSOD, app crashes\n\nRing 2 - Production Servers (Day 7-14):\n    Scope:     All security patches\n    Method:    SCCM maintenance windows (off-hours)\n    Targets:   Production servers by tier\n    Approval:  Standard change with CAB approval\n    Monitoring: Application health checks, performance baseline\n\nRing 3 - Workstations (Day 14-21):\n    Scope:     All security patches + quality updates\n    Method:    Windows Update for Business \u002F Intune\n    Targets:   All managed workstations\n    Approval:  Pre-approved standard change\n    Monitoring: Help desk ticket monitoring for issues\n\nRing 4 - Stragglers (Day 21-30):\n    Scope:     Catch remaining unpatched systems\n    Method:    Forced deployment with restart\n    Targets:   Systems that missed prior rings\n    Approval:  Compliance-driven enforcement\n```\n\n### Step 5: Validation and Reporting\n\n```\nPost-Deployment Validation:\n  1. Re-scan environment with updated vulnerability signatures\n  2. Compare pre-patch and post-patch scan results\n  3. Calculate patch compliance rate per ring and department\n  4. Identify failed patches and investigate root causes\n  5. Generate compliance report for management review\n  6. Update risk register with residual unpatched vulnerabilities\n  7. Document exceptions and compensating controls\n```\n\n## Best Practices\n1. Subscribe to MSRC notifications and vendor analysis blogs for early intelligence\n2. Maintain a dedicated Patch Tuesday war room or Slack\u002FTeams channel\n3. Always patch zero-day vulnerabilities outside the normal ring schedule\n4. Test patches against critical business applications before broad deployment\n5. Track patch compliance metrics month-over-month for trend analysis\n6. Maintain rollback procedures for every deployment ring\n7. Coordinate with application owners for compatibility testing\n8. Document all exceptions with compensating controls and review dates\n\n## Common Pitfalls\n- Deploying all patches simultaneously without ring-based testing\n- Not scanning after patching to validate remediation\n- Treating all patches equally without risk-based prioritization\n- Ignoring cumulative update dependencies causing patch failures\n- Not accounting for server reboot requirements in maintenance windows\n- Failing to communicate patch status to business stakeholders\n\n## Related Skills\n- implementing-rapid7-insightvm-for-scanning\n- performing-cve-prioritization-with-kev-catalog\n- implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla\n- implementing-patch-management-workflow\n",{"name":5,"tags":55,"author":56,"domain":48,"license":15,"version":57,"nist_csf":58,"subdomain":63,"description":7,"mitre_attack":64},[37,36,46,35,34,33,32],"mahipal","1.0",[59,60,61,62],"ID.RA-01","ID.RA-02","ID.IM-02","ID.RA-06","vulnerability-management",[65,66,67,68,69],"T1190","T1203","T1068","T1210","T1588.006","main","54a798831d2266a3ca61ce68a7acb80b81160d57","skills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process",4414,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills","https:\u002F\u002Fmahipal.engineer\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002F","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975","Mahipal.engineer","🔐 Cybersecurity | 💻 Dev | 📷 Street Photographer\r\n🎓 MSc | 📚 Research & AI Security","2026-08-31 12:32:44",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":81,"prompt":91,"zipAvailable":92},[82,85,88],{"tool":83,"command":84},"npx","npx skills add mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills --skill building-patch-tuesday-response-process",{"tool":86,"command":87},"bunx","bunx skills add mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills --skill building-patch-tuesday-response-process",{"tool":89,"command":90},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add mukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills --skill building-patch-tuesday-response-process","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002FSKILL.md",true,[94,100,105,111,115,119,125],{"path":95,"resourceType":96,"resourceTypeDesc":97,"sizeBytes":98,"sourceHtmlUrl":99},"assets\u002Ftemplate.md","ASSET","资产文件",1044,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002Fassets\u002Ftemplate.md",{"path":101,"resourceType":101,"resourceTypeDesc":102,"sizeBytes":103,"sourceHtmlUrl":104},"LICENSE","许可证",11255,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002FLICENSE",{"path":106,"resourceType":107,"resourceTypeDesc":108,"sizeBytes":109,"sourceHtmlUrl":110},"references\u002Fapi-reference.md","REFERENCE","参考文档",1861,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002Freferences\u002Fapi-reference.md",{"path":112,"resourceType":107,"resourceTypeDesc":108,"sizeBytes":113,"sourceHtmlUrl":114},"references\u002Fstandards.md",1410,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002Freferences\u002Fstandards.md",{"path":116,"resourceType":107,"resourceTypeDesc":108,"sizeBytes":117,"sourceHtmlUrl":118},"references\u002Fworkflows.md",2905,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002Freferences\u002Fworkflows.md",{"path":120,"resourceType":121,"resourceTypeDesc":122,"sizeBytes":123,"sourceHtmlUrl":124},"scripts\u002Fagent.py","SCRIPT","脚本",6492,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002Fscripts\u002Fagent.py",{"path":126,"resourceType":121,"resourceTypeDesc":122,"sizeBytes":127,"sourceHtmlUrl":128},"scripts\u002Fprocess.py",7182,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fbuilding-patch-tuesday-response-process\u002Fscripts\u002Fprocess.py",[130,157,181,205,230,256],{"skillNo":131,"name":132,"nameZh":6,"description":133,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":134,"categories":135,"keywords":137,"publishedAt":50},"01M6AGDM3HJXTKXX15ZZ0ZVCJ3","verifying-build-provenance-with-slsa-sigstore","Verifies artifact signatures and SLSA provenance using Sigstore's cosign (verify, verify-attestation, verify-blob-attestation) and slsa-verifier (verify-artifact), enforcing keyless OIDC builder identity and source repo against SLSA Build levels. Use in CI\u002FCD before deploying artifacts, when consuming third-party attestations, establishing a SLSA Build L3 pipeline, or confirming provenance during incident response or admission control.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fverifying-build-provenance-with-slsa-sigstore\u002FSKILL.md",[136],{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[138,139,140,141,142,48,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156],"sigstore","provenance","slsa","verifying build provenance with slsa sigstore","security","incident response","identity","pr","code","artifacts","ci","supply-chain","pipeline","supply-chain-security","t1195","attestation","code-signing","cosign","keyless",{"skillNo":158,"name":159,"nameZh":6,"description":160,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":161,"categories":162,"keywords":164,"publishedAt":50},"01M6AGDGBPWYVZ2F11GFKJ4HZ9","validating-tpm-measured-boot-attestation","Verifies TPM 2.0 measured-boot integrity and remote attestation with tpm2-tools -- reading PCRs (tpm2_pcrread), replaying the boot event log, generating and checking signed quotes (tpm2_quote\u002Ftpm2_checkquote), and sealing secrets to a PCR policy. Use to confirm a system booted trusted firmware\u002Fkernel for Zero Trust device posture, detect boot-chain tampering via PCR drift, or build a golden-value baseline for fleet attestation.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fvalidating-tpm-measured-boot-attestation\u002FSKILL.md",[163],{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[165,153,166,167,142,168,48,145,169,170,171,172,173,174,175,176,177,178,179,180],"boot","TPM","validating tpm measured boot attestation","policy","verification","ZeRO","firmware","Tools","measured-boot","PCR","integrity","secrets","remote-attestation","tpm2-tools","integrity-verification","trusted-computing",{"skillNo":182,"name":183,"nameZh":6,"description":184,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":185,"categories":186,"keywords":189,"publishedAt":50},"01M6AGDCW0Y4FXZ3362GT1941M","validating-backup-integrity-for-recovery","Validates backup integrity through cryptographic hash verification, automated restore testing, corruption detection, and recoverability checks to confirm backups are reliable for disaster recovery and ransomware response. Use before relying on backups for recovery, when building post-backup validation pipelines, auditing backup infrastructure for compliance, or checking immutable\u002Fair-gapped backups for silent corruption or tampering.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fvalidating-backup-integrity-for-recovery\u002FSKILL.md",[187,188],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[175,190,191,192,40,48,193,31,169,194,195,196,197,198,199,200,201,202,203,204],"backup","recovery","validating backup integrity for recovery","infrastructure","compliance","hash-verification","incident-response","ransomware","cryptocurrency","detection","t1078","t1490","immutable","disaster-recovery","restore-testing",{"skillNo":206,"name":207,"nameZh":6,"description":208,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":209,"categories":210,"keywords":212,"publishedAt":50},"01M6AGD9GBG2KZ336AE763J3WH","triaging-windows-with-kape","Runs KAPE (Kroll Artifact Parser and Extractor) to collect targeted forensic artifacts (registry hives, $MFT, event logs, prefetch, browser data) via Targets and parse them with Modules wrapping Eric Zimmerman's EZ Tools (PECmd, MFTECmd, RECmd). Use during early incident containment\u002Ftriage when full disk imaging is impractical but a defensible, parseable Windows artifact set is needed quickly, including at-scale remote collection.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Ftriaging-windows-with-kape\u002FSKILL.md",[211],{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[45,213,214,48,215,216,217,218,219,220,221,222,223,224,225,226,172,227,228,229],"kape","triaging windows with kape","registry","browser","logs","windows-forensics","dfir","mft","mftecmd","data","prefetch","eric-zimmerman","digital-forensics","SET","collection","pecmd","artifact-collection",{"skillNo":231,"name":232,"nameZh":6,"description":233,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":234,"categories":235,"keywords":237,"publishedAt":50},"01M6AGD5PW5J4EVZM958WD74ZQ","triaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework","Triages and prioritizes vulnerabilities with CISA's Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization (SSVC) decision tree, weighing exploitation status (via the CISA KEV catalog and FIRST EPSS API), technical impact, automatability, and mission prevalence to output Track\u002FTrack*\u002FAttend\u002FAct decisions. Use when prioritizing vulnerability scan results (OpenVAS, Nessus, Qualys) for remediation planning beyond raw CVSS scores.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Ftriaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework\u002FSKILL.md",[236],{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[238,239,240,48,241,242,243,63,244,245,246,247,248,249,250,251,252,253,254,255],"vulnerabilities","framework","triaging vulnerabilities with ssvc framework","status","planning","CISA","risk-management","nessus","qualys","openvas","cvss","remediation","risk","vulnerability","api","prioritization","ssvc","decision-tree",{"skillNo":257,"name":258,"nameZh":6,"description":259,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":260,"categories":261,"keywords":263,"publishedAt":50},"01M6AGD24TTQQM4CXG69E3B9TJ","triaging-security-incident","Performs initial triage of security incidents using the NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks, classifying incident type, assigning priority by business impact, and routing to the appropriate response team. Use when a SIEM\u002FEDR alert needs human classification, concurrent alerts must be prioritized, or a user report or threat-intel IOC match requires initial incident categorization.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fmukul975\u002FAnthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Ftriaging-security-incident\u002FSKILL.md",[262],{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[142,264,48,265,266,267,268,269,270,271,272,200,273,201,274,275,276,277,278,279],"triaging security incident","siem","file","ioc","soc","NIST-800-61","NIST","severity","edr","execution","analysis","classification","severity-classification","incident-triage","SANS-PICERL","SOC-operations"]