Repository navigation
Conversation
Co-authored-by: OpenCode Agent <agent@gsa.gov>
wz-gsa
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Adversarial draft review at c9fd57dcf4ac175a0065f92bf8065d1a21900593: the skill distinguishes mission-impact evidence from designation authority; High FIPS, PII/CUI, public exposure, interface count and a provider authorization do not auto-designate a high-value asset. It calls for consequence and cascade scenarios, evidence owners and explicit unknowns, without processing sensitive evidence. Generated INDEX/CATALOG entries match the skill\x27s declared routing; reported checks are green. No blocking finding in the reviewed draft. The PR\x27s unchecked human security-review/label item and draft state remain separate gates. Static review only, AI-assisted (OpenCode); this is not designation or merge authorization.
Summary
Adds one experimental security skill for reviewing preliminary system criticality evidence: mission consequences, dependency cascades, information/privilege concentration, and uncertainty. It does not designate an HVA or set FIPS, CUI, PII, or authorization status.
Eligibility & Accountability
AI Assistance Disclosure
OpenCode drafted a public-safe skill from the cited public source and regenerated repository indexes.
Pattern Information
Pattern ID:
criticality-evidence-screeningPattern Type:
skillStatus:
experimentalOwners:
@JJedinyTesting
Safety Checklist
Security Skill Checklist
needs-human-reviewlabel applied and human security review requested.Public Source Intake
Validation Results
Additional Context
This PR is a limited preliminary-evidence review, not an HVA procedure. It explicitly rejects automatic conclusions from High FISMA, PII/CUI, public exposure, interface count, or provider posture.