Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →ISO 27001 ISMS implementation and cybersecurity governance for HealthTech and MedTech companies. Use for ISMS design, security risk assessment, control implementation, ISO 27001 certification, security audits, incident response, and compliance verification. Covers ISO 27001, ISO 27002, healthcare security, and medical device cybersecurity.
.claude/skills/information-security-manager-iso27001/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-16 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-21 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
Implement and manage Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) aligned with ISO 27001:2022 and healthcare regulatory requirements.
Use this skill when you hear:
bashpython scripts/risk_assessment.py --scope "patient-data-system" --output risk_register.json
bashpython scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 --controls-file controls.csv
bashpython scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 --gap-analysis --output gaps.md
Automated security risk assessment following ISO 27001 Clause 6.1.2 methodology.
Usage:
bash# Full risk assessment python scripts/risk_assessment.py --scope "cloud-infrastructure" --output risks.json # Healthcare-specific assessment python scripts/risk_assessment.py --scope "ehr-system" --template healthcare --output risks.json # Quick asset-based assessment python scripts/risk_assessment.py --assets assets.csv --output risks.json
Parameters:
| Parameter | Required | Description | |-----------|----------|-------------| | --scope | Yes | System or area to assess | | --template | No | Assessment template: general, healthcare, cloud | | --assets | No | CSV file with asset inventory | | --output | No | Output file (default: stdout) | | --format | No | Output format: json, csv, markdown |
Output:
Verify ISO 27001/27002 control implementation status.
Usage:
bash# Check all ISO 27001 controls python scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 # Gap analysis with recommendations python scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 --gap-analysis # Check specific control domains python scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 --domains "access-control,cryptography" # Export compliance report python scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 --output compliance_report.md
Parameters:
| Parameter | Required | Description | |-----------|----------|-------------| | --standard | Yes | Standard to check: iso27001, iso27002, hipaa | | --controls-file | No | CSV with current control status | | --gap-analysis | No | Include remediation recommendations | | --domains | No | Specific control domains to check | | --output | No | Output file path |
Output:
Step 1: Define Scope and Context
Document organizational context and ISMS boundaries:
Validation: Scope statement reviewed and approved by management.
Step 2: Conduct Risk Assessment
bashpython scripts/risk_assessment.py --scope "full-organization" --template general --output initial_risks.json
Validation: Risk register contains all critical assets with assigned owners.
Step 3: Select and Implement Controls
Map risks to ISO 27002 controls:
bashpython scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27002 --gap-analysis --output control_gaps.md
Control categories:
Validation: Statement of Applicability (SoA) documents all controls with justification.
Step 4: Establish Monitoring
Define security metrics:
Validation: Dashboard shows real-time compliance status.
Step 1: Asset Identification
Create asset inventory:
| Asset Type | Examples | Classification | |------------|----------|----------------| | Information | Patient records, source code | Confidential | | Software | EHR system, APIs | Critical | | Hardware | Servers, medical devices | High | | Services | Cloud hosting, backup | High | | People | Admin accounts, developers | Varies |
Validation: All assets have assigned owners and classifications.
Step 2: Threat Analysis
Identify threats per asset category:
| Asset | Threats | Likelihood | |-------|---------|------------| | Patient data | Unauthorized access, breach | High | | Medical devices | Malware, tampering | Medium | | Cloud services | Misconfiguration, outage | Medium | | Credentials | Phishing, brute force | High |
Validation: Threat model covers top-10 industry threats.
Step 3: Vulnerability Assessment
bashpython scripts/risk_assessment.py --scope "network-infrastructure" --output vuln_risks.json
Document vulnerabilities:
Validation: Vulnerability scan results mapped to risk register.
Step 4: Risk Evaluation and Treatment
Calculate risk: Risk = Likelihood × Impact
| Risk Level | Score | Treatment | |------------|-------|-----------| | Critical | 20-25 | Immediate action required | | High | 15-19 | Treatment plan within 30 days | | Medium | 10-14 | Treatment plan within 90 days | | Low | 5-9 | Accept or monitor | | Minimal | 1-4 | Accept |
Validation: All high/critical risks have approved treatment plans.
Step 1: Detection and Reporting
Incident categories:
Validation: Incident logged within 15 minutes of detection.
Step 2: Triage and Classification
| Severity | Criteria | Response Time | |----------|----------|---------------| | Critical | Data breach, system down | Immediate | | High | Active threat, significant risk | 1 hour | | Medium | Contained threat, limited impact | 4 hours | | Low | Minor violation, no impact | 24 hours |
Validation: Severity assigned and escalation triggered if needed.
Step 3: Containment and Eradication
Immediate actions:
Validation: Containment confirmed, no ongoing compromise.
Step 4: Recovery and Lessons Learned
Post-incident activities:
Validation: Post-incident report completed within 5 business days.
references/iso27001-controls.md
references/risk-assessment-guide.md
references/incident-response.md
| Phase | Checkpoint | Evidence Required | |-------|------------|-------------------| | Scope | Scope approved | Signed scope document | | Risk | Register complete | Risk register with owners | | Controls | SoA approved | Statement of Applicability | | Operation | Metrics active | Dashboard screenshots | | Audit | Internal audit done | Audit report |
Before Stage 1 audit:
Before Stage 2 audit:
Run periodic checks:
bash# Monthly compliance check python scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 --output monthly_$(date +%Y%m).md # Quarterly gap analysis python scripts/compliance_checker.py --standard iso27001 --gap-analysis --output quarterly_gaps.md
Scenario: Assess security risks for a patient data management system.
bashpython scripts/risk_assessment.py --scope "patient-data-system" --template healthcare
Asset inventory output:
| Asset ID | Asset | Type | Owner | Classification | |----------|-------|------|-------|----------------| | A001 | Patient database | Information | DBA Team | Confidential | | A002 | EHR application | Software | App Team | Critical | | A003 | Database server | Hardware | Infra Team | High | | A004 | Admin credentials | Access | Security | Critical |
Risk register output:
| Risk ID | Asset | Threat | Vulnerability | L | I | Score | |---------|-------|--------|---------------|---|---|-------| | R001 | A001 | Data breach | Weak encryption | 3 | 5 | 15 | | R002 | A002 | SQL injection | Input validation | 4 | 4 | 16 | | R003 | A004 | Credential theft | No MFA | 4 | 5 | 20 |
| Risk | Treatment | Control | Timeline | |------|-----------|---------|----------| | R001 | Mitigate | Implement AES-256 encryption | 30 days | | R002 | Mitigate | Add input validation, WAF | 14 days | | R003 | Mitigate | Enforce MFA for all admins | 7 days |
bashpython scripts/compliance_checker.py --controls-file implemented_controls.csv
Verification output:
Control Implementation Status
=============================
Cryptography (A.8.24): IMPLEMENTED
- AES-256 at rest: YES
- TLS 1.3 in transit: YES
Access Control (A.8.5): IMPLEMENTED
- MFA enabled: YES
- Admin accounts: 100% coverage
Application Security (A.8.26): PARTIAL
- Input validation: YES
- WAF deployed: PENDING
Overall Compliance: 87%| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-19 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +27 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.