analyzing-campaign-attribution-evidence

SKILLWorkflowcommunity
v0.0.0seikaikyoMITUpdated 1mo agoSource →

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 attributi

Community-submitted skill. Not yet reviewed by the Forge team. Full prompt content may not be available.Request review →
2Repo stars
1Clients
1Formats
1mo agoLast update
Skill
Authorseikaikyo
Version0.0.0
LicenseMIT
CategoryWorkflow
Formatsskill.md
PromptNot published
Compatibility
Claude✓ Supported
Cursor—
Copilot—
ChatGPT—
Gemini—
About

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.

Keywords
skillclaude

No dependency coverage

This entry publishes no npm package, so Forge has no dependency tree for it. That is a gap in coverage — not a statement that it has no dependencies.