Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Executes a structured ransomware incident response from initial detection through containment, forensic analysis, decryption assessment, recovery, and post-incident hardening. Addresses ransom negotiation considerations, backup integrity verification, and regulatory notification requirements. Activates for requests involving ransomware response, ransomware recovery, crypto-ransomware, data encryption attack, ransom payment decision, or ransomware containment.
.claude/skills/performing-ransomware-response/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-21 | ✗→✗ | = Same ✗ | — | — |
| case-02 | ✗→✗ | = Same ✗ | — | — |
| case-06 | ✗→✗ | = Same ✗ | — | — |
| case-19 | ✗→✗ | = Same ✗ | — | — |
Do not use for general malware incidents that do not involve file encryption or extortion; use malware incident response procedures instead.
Validate that the incident is ransomware and determine the variant:
Ransomware Identification:
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Variant: LockBit 3.0 (Black)
Extension: .lockbit3
Ransom Note: README-LOCKBIT.txt
Tor Site: lockbit[redacted].onion
Deployment: Group Policy Object pushing ransomware.exe to all domain-joined systems
Initial Access: VPN credential compromise (no MFA)
Dwell Time: 12 days
Data Exfiltration: Yes - 47GB uploaded to MEGA via rclone prior to encryptionStop ransomware propagation before assessing damage:
Quantify the impact to inform recovery and business decisions:
Impact Assessment:
Encrypted Systems: 187 of 340 endpoints (55%)
Encrypted Servers: 12 of 28 (43%) - includes 2 file servers, 1 database server
Domain Controllers: 2 of 3 encrypted
Backup Status: Veeam repository intact (offline copy verified clean)
Data Exfiltration: Confirmed - 47GB to MEGA (file listing under analysis)
Ransom Demand: $2.5M in Bitcoin (72-hour deadline)
OFAC Screening: LockBit - not currently sanctioned entity (verify with counsel)Evaluate recovery options in consultation with legal, executive leadership, and cyber insurance:
| Option | Pros | Cons | Recommended When | |--------|------|------|-----------------| | Restore from backup | No payment, no legal risk | Recovery time may be days | Clean backups available | | Free decryptor | No payment, fast | Rare availability | Variant has published decryptor | | Negotiate and pay | Potentially faster | No guarantee, legal risk, funds threat actors | No backups, business survival at stake | | Rebuild from scratch | Clean environment | Longest timeline, data loss | Backups compromised, willing to accept data loss |
Implement the chosen recovery strategy:
If restoring from backup:
If using a decryptor:
Implement controls to prevent recurrence:
| Term | Definition | |------|------------| | Double Extortion | Ransomware tactic combining file encryption with data exfiltration and threat to publish stolen data | | Immutable Backup | Backup storage that cannot be modified or deleted for a defined retention period, protecting against ransomware targeting backups | | OFAC Sanctions | U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control restrictions that may prohibit ransom payments to sanctioned entities or jurisdictions | | Dwell Time | Days the attacker was present before deploying ransomware; critical for determining which backups are clean | | Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) | Criminal business model where ransomware developers lease their malware to affiliates who conduct attacks | | Rclone | Legitimate cloud sync tool commonly abused by ransomware operators for data exfiltration before encryption | | 3-2-1-1-0 Backup Rule | Backup strategy requiring 3 copies, 2 media types, 1 offsite, 1 immutable/air-gapped, and 0 errors in recovery testing |
Context: Attackers compromised VPN credentials (no MFA), spent 12 days performing reconnaissance, disabled antivirus via GPO, exfiltrated 47GB of data, and deployed LockBit 3.0 across the domain via GPO at 2:00 AM on a Sunday.
Approach:
Pitfalls:
RANSOMWARE INCIDENT REPORT
===========================
Incident: INC-2025-1892
Ransomware Family: LockBit 3.0 (Black)
Date Detected: 2025-11-17T06:45:00Z
Initial Access: VPN credential compromise (no MFA)
Dwell Time: 12 days
IMPACT SUMMARY
Encrypted Systems: 187 endpoints, 12 servers
Business Impact: Full operations disruption
Data Exfiltrated: 47GB (finance, HR, legal documents)
Ransom Demand: $2.5M BTC (72-hour deadline)
Backup Status: Veeam immutable repository - CLEAN
RECOVERY APPROACH
Decision: Restore from backup (no ransom payment)
Recovery Start: 2025-11-17T10:00:00Z
DC Rebuild: Complete - 2025-11-17T18:00:00Z
Critical Systems: Restored - 2025-11-18T12:00:00Z
Full Recovery: Estimated 2025-11-21
CONTAINMENT TIMELINE
06:45 UTC - Ransomware detected by SOC analyst
07:00 UTC - Network segments disconnected
07:15 UTC - Incident commander activated IR plan
07:30 UTC - Backup integrity verification started
08:00 UTC - Memory forensics initiated on 2 live systems
10:00 UTC - Recovery operations commenced in clean room
POST-INCIDENT ACTIONS
1. MFA enforced on all VPN and remote access
2. 3-2-1-1-0 backup architecture implemented
3. Network segmentation between workstation/server VLANs
4. LAPS deployed for local administrator passwords
5. Regulatory notifications filed (GDPR 72-hour, state AG)| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-23 | 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. 23 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +4 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 23 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.