Communitygithub.com

achieving-cmmc-level-2-compliance

>-

achieving-cmmc-level-2-compliance 是什么?

achieving-cmmc-level-2-compliance is a Claude Code agent skill that >-.

兼容平台~Claude Code~Codex CLI~Cursor
npx skills add https://github.com/mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills/tree/main/skills/achieving-cmmc-level-2-compliance

在你喜欢的 AI 中提问

打开一个已预加载此 Agent Skill 的新对话。

文档

Achieving CMMC Level 2 Compliance

When to Use

  • When an organization in the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) stores, processes, or transmits Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract.
  • When a contract includes DFARS 252.204-7012 (safeguarding/incident reporting), -7019/-7020 (NIST 800-171 self-assessment + SPRS), or the new -7021 (CMMC requirement).
  • When preparing for a C3PAO third-party assessment or a DoD-led assessment.
  • When you must compute, post, or improve an SPRS score based on the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology.
  • When authoring or remediating a System Security Plan (SSP) and POA&M for the 110 requirements.
  • When scoping which assets fall inside the CUI/FCI boundary (CUI assets, security-protection assets, contractor risk-managed assets, out-of-scope).

Prerequisites

  • Knowledge of which contracts carry CUI and the CUI categories involved (check the contract and the DoD CUI Registry).
  • An asset inventory and network diagram so you can define the CMMC assessment scope before assessing controls.
  • The NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 requirements and the DoD Assessment Methodology scoring weights.
  • A documented SSP (its absence is itself a failed requirement — 3.12.4).
  • Identification of any External Service Providers (ESPs) / cloud services touching CUI, and whether they meet FedRAMP Moderate (or equivalency).

Workflow

1. Determine applicability and CUI categories

Confirm the contract requires CMMC Level 2 (CUI present, not just FCI). FCI-only contracts are Level 1 (the 15 FAR 52.204-21 requirements). Identify CUI categories from the contract and the DoD CUI Registry.

2. Scope the environment

Classify every asset into one of the CMMC scoping categories:

  • CUI Assets — process/store/transmit CUI (in scope, assessed against all applicable controls).
  • Security Protection Assets — provide security to the CUI environment (in scope).
  • Contractor Risk Managed Assets — could but are not intended to handle CUI; managed by policy.
  • Specialized Assets (IoT/OT, GFE, test equipment) — documented, limited assessment.
  • Out-of-Scope — physically/logically isolated from CUI.

Minimize scope deliberately — a smaller, well-segmented CUI enclave is far cheaper to certify than a flat network.

3. Implement the 110 requirements (NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2)

Work the 14 families (3.1–3.14). For each requirement, implement, then write the how in the SSP. High-leverage early wins: MFA (3.5.3), FIPS-validated cryptography (3.13.11), audit logging (3.3.x), access control + least privilege (3.1.x), and incident response (3.6.x).

4. Score with the DoD Assessment Methodology (SPRS)

Start at 110 and subtract the weighted value (1, 3, or 5 points) of each unmet requirement; partial credit applies to a small number of controls (e.g., MFA, FIPS crypto). The result is the SPRS score (maximum 110; the methodology floor is −203). Post the score, the SSP date, and the assessment scope to SPRS (or eMASS for higher assessments).

5. Build a compliant POA&M

Document every unmet requirement with owner, remediation, and milestone. Constraints under the CMMC rule: a Conditional status requires a score of at least 80% (≥ 88 of 110), only POA&M-eligible requirements may be deferred (the highest-weighted security requirements must be fully met — verify eligibility against 32 CFR Part 170), and all POA&M items must be closed within 180 days to convert Conditional → Final.

6. Assess (self or C3PAO)

  • Level 1 and a subset of Level 2 = annual self-assessment with an affirmation in SPRS.
  • Level 2 (most CUI contracts) = triennial C3PAO certification assessment.
  • Level 3 = DoD (DIBCAC) assessment on top of Level 2, adding SP 800-172 enhanced requirements. Assessors evaluate each objective as MET / NOT MET / N/A with evidence (examine/interview/test). A senior official files the annual affirmation of continued compliance.

7. Maintain certification

Certification is valid three years with annual affirmations. Maintain the SSP, re-score on change, keep evidence current, and feed significant changes back into the assessment.

Key Concepts

ConceptDefinition
FCIFederal Contract Information — Level 1 protects it (FAR 52.204-21).
CUIControlled Unclassified Information — Level 2 protects it (NIST 800-171).
110 requirementsThe SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families.
SPRSSupplier Performance Risk System — where the 800-171 score is posted.
DoD Assessment MethodologyThe 1/3/5-point weighting used to compute the score from 110.
C3PAOCMMC Third-Party Assessment Organization — performs Level 2 certification.
POA&MPlan of Action & Milestones — limited, must close in 180 days for Final status.
Conditional vs FinalConditional = open POA&M (score ≥ 80%); Final = all controls met.
ESPExternal Service Provider — must meet FedRAMP Moderate / equivalency for CUI.
Scoping categoriesCUI / Security Protection / Contractor Risk Managed / Specialized / Out-of-Scope.

Tools & Systems

  • NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 — the 110 requirements (and 800-171A for assessment objectives).
  • DoD NIST SP 800-171 Assessment Methodology — the scoring weights.
  • 32 CFR Part 170 (CMMC Program rule) and 48 CFR / DFARS 252.204-7021 (acquisition rule).
  • SPRS — score posting; SAM.gov for registration.
  • SP 800-172 / 800-172A — enhanced requirements for Level 3.
  • GRC / compliance tooling — to manage the SSP, POA&M, and evidence (e.g., Xacta, RegScale, FutureFeed-style trackers).

Common Scenarios

  • Prime flows CUI to a sub. The sub needs its own Level 2 scope, SSP, SPRS score, and (most likely) C3PAO certification.
  • Score is below 88. Prioritize the highest-weighted unmet requirements (5-point, then 3-point) to clear the conditional threshold and shrink the POA&M.
  • Cloud holds CUI. Confirm the service is FedRAMP Moderate authorized or meets equivalency; document the responsibility split.
  • Flat network. Re-scope into a segmented CUI enclave to cut the assessment surface before spending on controls.
  • Annual affirmation due. A senior official affirms continued compliance in SPRS; let it lapse and you risk contract eligibility.

Output Format

Produce a CMMC Level 2 Readiness Report using assets/template.md, containing:

  1. Applicability & CUI categories — why Level 2 applies.
  2. Scope — assets by scoping category and the CUI boundary diagram reference.
  3. Control status by family — met / not met / N/A across the 14 families.
  4. SPRS score — computed score, deductions, and the gap to 110 and to the 88 threshold.
  5. POA&M — unmet requirements, eligibility check, owners, 180-day milestones.
  6. Assessment path — self vs C3PAO, target date, affirmation owner.
  7. Remediation roadmap — sequenced by point value and effort.

Use scripts/process.py to compute the SPRS score from a control-status JSON, flag POA&M-eligibility concerns, and report the gap to the conditional-certification threshold.

Individual skills in this repo

This repo contains 20 individual skills — each has its own dedicated page.

abusing-dpapi-for-credential-access

Extract and decrypt Windows DPAPI-protected secrets (Credential Manager, browser logins/cookies, Wi-Fi credentials, KeePass keys) online or offline using SharpDPAPI, SharpChrome, Mimikatz, or Impacket

abusing-shadow-credentials-for-privesc

Take over Active Directory accounts by writing attacker-controlled public keys to msDS-KeyCredentialLink (Shadow Credentials) with pyWhisker, Whisker, or Certipy, then authenticate via PKINIT to recover the target

acquiring-disk-image-with-dd-and-dcfldd

Create forensically sound bit-for-bit disk images with dd or dcfldd on a Linux forensic workstation, preserving evidence integrity through hash verification (MD5/SHA) during acquisition. Use when imaging a suspect drive, USB device, or memory card for investigation, preserving volatile disk evidence during incident response, or producing a verified copy for legal or law-enforcement proceedings before any destructive analysis.

analyzing-active-directory-acl-abuse

Detect dangerous ACL misconfigurations in Active Directory using ldap3

analyzing-android-malware-with-apktool

Perform static analysis of Android APK malware using apktool for resource decompilation, jadx for Java source recovery, and androguard for manifest inspection, dangerous permission-combination detection, and identification of obfuscated code, dynamic code loading, and reflection-based API calls. Use to statically triage a suspicious APK without executing it or to build mobile malware detection rules.

analyzing-api-gateway-access-logs

Parses API Gateway access logs (AWS API Gateway, Kong, Nginx) to detect

analyzing-apt-group-with-mitre-navigator

Query ATT&CK data with attackcti, mitreattack-python, and stix2, then build MITRE ATT&CK Navigator layers and multi-layer heatmap overlays mapping one or more APT groups

analyzing-azure-activity-logs-for-threats

Queries Azure Monitor activity logs and sign-in logs via azure-monitor-query

analyzing-bootkit-and-rootkit-samples

Analyzes bootkit and advanced rootkit malware infecting the Master

analyzing-browser-forensics-with-hindsight

Parse Chromium-based browser databases with Hindsight to extract and correlate browsing history, downloads, cookies, cached content, autofill data, saved passwords, and extensions from Chrome, Edge, Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi into a unified timeline (XLSX, JSON, or SQLite output). Use during incident response, insider-threat investigations, or criminal cases when you need to reconstruct a user

analyzing-campaign-attribution-evidence

Systematically evaluate cyber-campaign evidence to attribute an operation to a threat actor, using the Diamond Model and Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to weigh infrastructure overlaps, TTP consistency, malware code similarity, and timing/language artifacts into confidence-weighted attribution assessments. Use when an incident investigation needs a defensible attribution confidence level.

analyzing-certificate-transparency-for-phishing

Monitor Certificate Transparency logs using crt.sh and Certstream to

analyzing-cloud-storage-access-patterns

Detect abnormal access in AWS S3, GCS, and Azure Blob Storage by analyzing CloudTrail Data Events, GCS audit logs, and Azure Storage Analytics for after-hours bulk downloads, new-IP access, and API-call spikes (e.g. GetObject) via statistical baselines and time-series anomaly detection. Use when investigating suspected cloud data exfiltration or building related detection rules.

analyzing-cobalt-strike-beacon-configuration

Extract and analyze Cobalt Strike beacon configuration from PE files

analyzing-cobaltstrike-malleable-c2-profiles

Parse and analyze Cobalt Strike Malleable C2 profiles with dissect.cobaltstrike (profiles and beacon-payload configs) and pyMalleableC2 (AST parsing) to extract HTTP/DNS transforms, URIs, headers, sleep/jitter, and injection behavior, then generate network detection signatures. Use when reverse-engineering a captured malleable profile or building detections against Cobalt Strike Beacon traffic.

analyzing-command-and-control-communication

Analyzes malware C2 communication over HTTP, HTTPS, DNS, and custom

analyzing-cyber-kill-chain

Analyzes intrusion activity against the Lockheed Martin Cyber Kill Chain

analyzing-disk-image-with-autopsy

Perform comprehensive forensic analysis of raw (dd), E01, or AFF disk images with Autopsy and The Sleuth Kit, recovering deleted files, examining metadata and embedded artifacts, keyword searching, and building investigation timelines with visual reports. Use for structured analysis of a forensic disk image or when stakeholders need visual reports from evidence.

analyzing-dns-logs-for-exfiltration

Analyzes DNS query logs to detect data exfiltration via DNS tunneling,

analyzing-docker-container-forensics

Investigate compromised Docker containers by analyzing images, layers,

相关技能