Security leadership for growth-stage companies. Risk quantification in dollars, compliance roadmap (SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR), security architecture strategy, incident response leadership, and board-level security reporting. Use when building security programs, justifying security budget, selecting compliance frameworks, managing incidents, assessing vendor risk, or when user mentions CISO, secu
cd ~/.claude/skills
git clone https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills.git claude-skills mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills/ciso-advisor
curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills/HEAD/.gemini/skills/ciso-advisor/SKILL.md \
-o ~/.claude/skills/ciso-advisor/SKILL.md Risk-based security frameworks for growth-stage companies. Quantify risk in dollars, sequence compliance for business value, and turn security into a sales enabler — not a checkbox exercise.
CISO, security strategy, risk quantification, ALE, SLE, ARO, security posture, compliance roadmap, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, GDPR, zero trust, defense in depth, incident response, board security reporting, vendor assessment, security budget, cyber risk, program maturity
python scripts/risk_quantifier.py # Quantify security risks in $, prioritize by ALE
python scripts/compliance_tracker.py # Map framework overlaps, estimate effort and cost
Translate technical risks into business impact: revenue loss, regulatory fines, reputational damage. Use ALE to prioritize. See references/security_strategy.md.
Formula: ALE = SLE × ARO (Single Loss Expectancy × Annual Rate of Occurrence). Board language: “This risk has $X expected annual loss. Mitigation costs $Y.”
Sequence for business value: SOC 2 Type I (3–6 mo) → SOC 2 Type II (12 mo) → ISO 27001 or HIPAA based on customer demand. See references/compliance_roadmap.md for timelines and costs.
Zero trust is a direction, not a product. Sequence: identity (IAM + MFA) → network segmentation → data classification. Defense in depth beats single-layer reliance. See references/security_strategy.md.
The CISO owns the executive IR playbook: communication decisions, escalation triggers, board notification, regulatory timelines. See references/incident_response.md for templates.
Frame security spend as risk transfer cost. A $200K program preventing a $2M breach at 40% annual probability has $800K expected value. See references/security_strategy.md.
Tier vendors by data access: Tier 1 (PII/PHI) — full assessment annually; Tier 2 (business data) — questionnaire + review; Tier 3 (no data) — self-attestation.
| Category | Metric | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Risk | ALE coverage (mitigated risk / total risk) | > 80% |
| Detection | Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) | < 24 hours |
| Response | Mean Time to Respond (MTTR) | < 4 hours |
| Compliance | Controls passing audit | > 95% |
| Hygiene | Critical patches within SLA | > 99% |
| Access | Privileged accounts reviewed quarterly | 100% |
| Vendor | Tier 1 vendors assessed annually | 100% |
| Training | Phishing simulation click rate | < 5% |
| When… | CISO works with… | To… |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise sales | CRO | Answer questionnaires, unblock deals |
| New product features | CTO/CPO | Threat modeling, security review |
| Compliance budget | CFO | Size program against risk exposure |
| Vendor contracts | Legal/COO | Security SLAs and right-to-audit |
| M&A due diligence | CEO/CFO | Target security posture assessment |
| Incident occurs | CEO/Legal | Response coordination and disclosure |
references/security_strategy.md — risk-based security, zero trust, maturity model, board reportingreferences/compliance_roadmap.md — SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR timelines, costs, overlapsreferences/incident_response.md — executive IR playbook, communication templates, tabletop designSurface these without being asked when you detect them in company context:
| Request | You Produce |
|---|---|
| ”Assess our security posture” | Risk register with quantified business impact (ALE) |
| “We need SOC 2” | Compliance roadmap with timeline, cost, effort, quick wins |
| ”Prep for security audit” | Gap analysis against target framework with remediation plan |
| ”We had an incident” | IR coordination plan + communication templates |
| ”Security board section” | Risk posture summary, compliance status, incident report |
Evaluate every decision through probability × impact. Quantify risks in business terms (dollars, not severity labels). Prioritize by expected annual loss.
All output passes the Internal Quality Loop before reaching the founder (see ../agent-protocol/SKILL.md).
company-context.md before responding (if it exists)[INVOKE:role|question]You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Use when starting feature work that needs isolation from current workspace or before executing implementation plans - ensures an isolated workspace exists via native tools or git worktree fallback
Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring skill invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions