* feat: C-Suite expansion — 8 new executive advisory roles Add COO, CPO, CMO, CFO, CRO, CISO, CHRO advisors and Executive Mentor. Expands C-level advisory from 2 to 10 roles with 74 total files. Each role includes: - SKILL.md (lean, <5KB, ~1200 tokens for context efficiency) - Reference docs (loaded on demand, not at startup) - Python analysis scripts (stdlib only, runnable CLI) Executive Mentor features /em: slash commands (challenge, board-prep, hard-call, stress-test, postmortem) with devil's advocate agent. 21 Python tools, 24 reference frameworks, 28,379 total lines. All SKILL.md files combined: ~17K tokens (8.5% of 200K context window). Badge: 88 → 116 skills * feat: C-Suite orchestration layer + 18 complementary skills ORCHESTRATION (new): - cs-onboard: Founder interview → company-context.md - chief-of-staff: Routing, synthesis, inter-agent orchestration - board-meeting: 6-phase multi-agent deliberation protocol - decision-logger: Two-layer memory (raw transcripts + approved decisions) - agent-protocol: Inter-agent invocation with loop prevention - context-engine: Company context loading + anonymization CROSS-CUTTING CAPABILITIES (new): - board-deck-builder: Board/investor update assembly - scenario-war-room: Cascading multi-variable what-if modeling - competitive-intel: Systematic competitor tracking + battlecards - org-health-diagnostic: Cross-functional health scoring (8 dimensions) - ma-playbook: M&A strategy (acquiring + being acquired) - intl-expansion: International market entry frameworks CULTURE & COLLABORATION (new): - culture-architect: Values → behaviors, culture code, health assessment - company-os: EOS/Scaling Up operating system selection + implementation - founder-coach: Founder development, delegation, blind spots - strategic-alignment: Strategy cascade, silo detection, alignment scoring - change-management: ADKAR-based change rollout framework - internal-narrative: One story across employees/investors/customers UPGRADES TO EXISTING ROLES: - All 10 roles get reasoning technique directives - All 10 roles get company-context.md integration - All 10 roles get board meeting isolation rules - CEO gets stage-adaptive temporal horizons (seed→C) Key design decisions: - Two-layer memory prevents hallucinated consensus from rejected ideas - Phase 2 isolation: agents think independently before cross-examination - Executive Mentor (The Critic) sees all perspectives, others don't - 25 Python tools total (stdlib only, no dependencies) 52 new files, 10 modified, 10,862 new lines. Total C-suite ecosystem: 134 files, 39,131 lines. * fix: connect all dots — Chief of Staff routes to all 28 skills - Added complementary skills registry to routing-matrix.md - Chief of Staff SKILL.md now lists all 28 skills in ecosystem - Added integration tables to scenario-war-room and competitive-intel - Badge: 116 → 134 skills - README: C-Level Advisory count 10 → 28 Quality audit passed: ✅ All 10 roles: company-context, reasoning, isolation, invocation ✅ All 6 phases in board meeting ✅ Two-layer memory with DO_NOT_RESURFACE ✅ Loop prevention (no self-invoke, max depth 2, no circular) ✅ All /em: commands present ✅ All complementary skills cross-reference roles ✅ Chief of Staff routes to every skill in ecosystem * refactor: CEO + CTO advisors upgraded to C-suite parity Both roles now match the structural standard of all new roles: - CEO: 11.7KB → 6.8KB SKILL.md (heavy content stays in references) - CTO: 10KB → 7.2KB SKILL.md (heavy content stays in references) Added to both: - Integration table (who they work with and when) - Key diagnostic questions - Structured metrics dashboard table - Consistent section ordering (Keywords → Quick Start → Responsibilities → Questions → Metrics → Red Flags → Integration → Reasoning → Context) CEO additions: - Stage-adaptive temporal horizons (seed=3m/6m/12m → B+=1y/3y/5y) - Cross-references to culture-architect and board-deck-builder CTO additions: - Key Questions section (7 diagnostic questions) - Structured metrics table (DORA + debt + team + architecture + cost) - Cross-references to all peer roles All 10 roles now pass structural parity: ✅ Keywords ✅ QuickStart ✅ Questions ✅ Metrics ✅ RedFlags ✅ Integration * feat: add proactive triggers + output artifacts to all 10 roles Every C-suite role now specifies: - Proactive Triggers: 'surface these without being asked' — context-driven early warnings that make advisors proactive, not reactive - Output Artifacts: concrete deliverables per request type (what you ask → what you get) CEO: runway alerts, board prep triggers, strategy review nudges CTO: deploy frequency monitoring, tech debt thresholds, bus factor flags COO: blocker detection, scaling threshold warnings, cadence gaps CPO: retention curve monitoring, portfolio dog detection, research gaps CMO: CAC trend monitoring, positioning gaps, budget staleness CFO: runway forecasting, burn multiple alerts, scenario planning gaps CRO: NRR monitoring, pipeline coverage, pricing review triggers CISO: audit overdue alerts, compliance gaps, vendor risk CHRO: retention risk, comp band gaps, org scaling thresholds Executive Mentor: board prep triggers, groupthink detection, hard call surfacing This transforms the C-suite from reactive advisors into proactive partners. * feat: User Communication Standard — structured output for all roles Defines 3 output formats in agent-protocol/SKILL.md: 1. Standard Output: Bottom Line → What → Why → How to Act → Risks → Your Decision 2. Proactive Alert: What I Noticed → Why It Matters → Action → Urgency (🔴🟡⚪) 3. Board Meeting: Decision Required → Perspectives → Agree/Disagree → Critic → Action Items 10 non-negotiable rules: - Bottom line first, always - Results and decisions only (no process narration) - What + Why + How for every finding - Actions have owners and deadlines ('we should consider' is banned) - Decisions framed as options with trade-offs - Founder is the highest authority — roles recommend, founder decides - Risks are concrete (if X → Y, costs $Z) - Max 5 bullets per section - No jargon without explanation - Silence over fabricated updates All 10 roles reference this standard. Chief of Staff enforces it as a quality gate. Board meeting Phase 4 uses the Board Meeting Output format. * feat: Internal Quality Loop — verification before delivery No role presents to the founder without passing verification: Step 1: Self-Verification (every role, every time) - Source attribution: where did each data point come from? - Assumption audit: [VERIFIED] vs [ASSUMED] tags on every finding - Confidence scoring: 🟢 high / 🟡 medium / 🔴 low per finding - Contradiction check against company-context + decision log - 'So what?' test: every finding needs a business consequence Step 2: Peer Verification (cross-functional) - Financial claims → CFO validates math - Revenue projections → CRO validates pipeline backing - Technical feasibility → CTO validates - People/hiring impact → CHRO validates - Skip for single-domain, low-stakes questions Step 3: Critic Pre-Screen (high-stakes only) - Irreversible decisions, >20% runway impact, strategy changes - Executive Mentor finds weakest point before founder sees it - Suspicious consensus triggers mandatory pre-screen Step 4: Course Correction (after founder feedback) - Approve → log + assign actions - Modify → re-verify changed parts - Reject → DO_NOT_RESURFACE + learn why - 30/60/90 day post-decision review Board meeting contributions now require self-verified format with confidence tags and source attribution on every finding. * fix: resolve PR review issues 1, 4, and minor observation Issue 1: c-level-advisor/CLAUDE.md — completely rewritten - Was: 2 skills (CEO, CTO only), dated Nov 2025 - Now: full 28-skill ecosystem map with architecture diagram, all roles/orchestration/cross-cutting/culture skills listed, design decisions, integration with other domains Issue 4: Root CLAUDE.md — updated all stale counts - 87 → 134 skills across all 3 references - C-Level: 2 → 33 (10 roles + 5 mentor commands + 18 complementary) - Tool count: 160+ → 185+ - Reference count: 200+ → 250+ Minor observation: Documented plugin.json convention - Explained in c-level-advisor/CLAUDE.md that only executive-mentor has plugin.json because only it has slash commands (/em: namespace) - Other skills are invoked by name through Chief of Staff or directly Also fixed: README.md 88+ → 134 in two places (first line + skills section) * fix: update all plugin/index registrations for 28-skill C-suite 1. c-level-advisor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json — v2.0.0 - Was: 2 skills, generic description - Now: all 28 skills listed with descriptions, all 25 scripts, namespace 'cs', full ecosystem description 2. .codex/skills-index.json — added 18 complementary skills - Was: 10 roles only - Now: 28 total c-level entries (10 roles + 6 orchestration + 6 cross-cutting + 6 culture) - Each with full description for skill discovery 3. .claude-plugin/marketplace.json — updated c-level-skills entry - Was: generic 2-skill description - Now: v2.0.0, full 28-skill ecosystem description, skills_count: 28, scripts_count: 25 * feat: add root SKILL.md for c-level-advisor ClawHub package --------- Co-authored-by: Leo <leo@openclaw.ai>
12 KiB
Security Strategy Reference
1. Risk-Based Security (Not Compliance-First)
The Problem with Compliance-First Security
Most startups build security backwards: they get a compliance requirement (SOC 2, ISO 27001) and treat it as the security program. This produces:
- Controls that pass audits but don't reduce actual risk
- Resources allocated to documentation over protection
- Security teams optimizing for auditor satisfaction, not threat reduction
- False confidence ("we passed our audit") before real security exists
The right order:
- Identify your actual threats (what do adversaries want from you?)
- Identify your crown jewels (what's worth protecting most?)
- Implement controls that address those threats to those assets
- Map existing controls to compliance requirements — most overlap naturally
Risk Identification Framework
Asset Classification:
Tier 1 — Crown Jewels
├── Customer PII/PHI
├── Payment card data
├── Intellectual property (source code, models, trade secrets)
└── Authentication credentials and secrets
Tier 2 — Business Critical
├── Internal communications (Slack, email)
├── Financial systems and data
├── Employee data
└── Business strategy documents
Tier 3 — Operational
├── Internal tooling and infrastructure configs
├── Non-sensitive operational data
└── Public-facing content and marketing
Threat Actor Profiling:
| Threat Actor | Motivation | Typical TTPs | Relative Likelihood |
|---|---|---|---|
| Financially motivated criminals | Data theft, ransomware | Phishing, credential stuffing | High |
| Nation-state | IP theft, espionage | Spear phishing, supply chain | Low-Medium (sector-dependent) |
| Insider threat | Financial gain, revenge | Privilege abuse, data exfil | Medium |
| Script kiddies | Notoriety, fun | Known CVEs, scanning | High (low sophistication) |
| Competitors | IP theft | Social engineering, insider recruitment | Low-Medium |
Risk Quantification (FAIR Model Simplified)
Annual Loss Expectancy:
ALE = SLE × ARO
SLE (Single Loss Expectancy) = Asset Value × Exposure Factor
ARO (Annual Rate of Occurrence) = historical frequency or industry estimate
Business Impact Categories:
- Direct financial loss: fraud, ransomware payment, theft
- Regulatory fines: GDPR (4% global revenue), HIPAA ($100–$50K per violation), PCI DSS
- Revenue impact: customer churn post-breach, deal loss during incident, downtime cost
- Reputational damage: brand devaluation (harder to quantify, but real)
- Legal costs: incident response counsel, class action defense, settlements
Example Risk Quantification:
| Risk Scenario | SLE | ARO | ALE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Customer data breach (10K records) | $850K | 0.15 | $127,500/yr |
| Ransomware attack | $350K | 0.20 | $70,000/yr |
| Credential compromise + fraud | $120K | 0.35 | $42,000/yr |
| Third-party SaaS breach | $95K | 0.25 | $23,750/yr |
| Insider data exfiltration | $180K | 0.10 | $18,000/yr |
Mitigation ROI:
ROSI = (Risk Reduction × ALE) - Control Cost
────────────────────────────────────
Control Cost
Example: MFA deployment
Risk reduction: 99% for credential attacks
ALE reduced: $42,000 × 0.99 = $41,580
Control cost: $5,000/yr
ROSI: ($41,580 - $5,000) / $5,000 = 731%
2. Zero Trust Architecture at Strategy Level
What Zero Trust Actually Means
Zero trust is not a product — it's an architectural principle: never trust, always verify, assume breach.
The traditional perimeter model (trust inside the network, distrust outside) fails because:
- Remote work destroyed the perimeter
- Cloud infrastructure has no perimeter
- 80% of breaches involve privileged account abuse (internal trust abused)
- Supply chain attacks compromise trusted software
Zero Trust Maturity Model
Stage 1 — Identity-Centric (Start Here)
- MFA enforced for all users, all applications
- Identity provider (Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace) as single control plane
- No shared service accounts
- Privileged Access Management (PAM) for admin access
- Cost: $20–80K/year | Timeline: 3–6 months
Stage 2 — Device Trust
- Endpoint detection and response (EDR) on all devices
- Device health checks before granting access
- Mobile device management (MDM) for BYOD
- Certificate-based device authentication
- Cost: $30–60K/year additional | Timeline: 6–12 months
Stage 3 — Network Micro-Segmentation
- Replace VPN with Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)
- Segment production from development from corporate
- East-west traffic inspection (not just north-south)
- Cost: $40–100K/year additional | Timeline: 12–18 months
Stage 4 — Application-Level Controls
- Just-in-time access (no standing privileges)
- Workload identity for service-to-service auth
- API gateway with authentication enforcement
- Continuous authorization (not just at login)
- Cost: $50–150K/year additional | Timeline: 18–30 months
Strategic Guidance:
- Don't sell zero trust as a project. It's a 3–5 year direction.
- Start with identity. It gives the most risk reduction per dollar.
- Measure progress by % of access covered by MFA, % of apps behind IdP, privilege account count.
3. Defense in Depth for Startups
The Layered Security Model
Layer 1: Governance & Policies
└── Asset inventory, acceptable use, vendor management
Layer 2: Perimeter Controls
└── WAF, DDoS protection, email security (DMARC/DKIM/SPF)
Layer 3: Identity & Access
└── MFA, SSO, PAM, just-in-time access, least privilege
Layer 4: Endpoint Security
└── EDR, device management, patch management
Layer 5: Application Security
└── SAST/DAST, dependency scanning, code review, API security
Layer 6: Data Protection
└── Encryption at rest and in transit, DLP, backup/recovery
Layer 7: Detection & Response
└── SIEM/SOAR, log aggregation, alerting, incident response
Layer 8: Recovery
└── Backup testing, DR plan, RTO/RPO targets
Startup Security Budget Allocation (Guidance)
| Stage | Annual Revenue | Recommended Security Budget | Priority Spend |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-seed/Seed | <$1M | 3–5% opex or $50–100K | MFA, backups, basic EDR |
| Series A | $1–10M | 2–4% revenue | +SIEM, SOC 2 Type I, AppSec |
| Series B | $10–50M | 3–5% revenue | +ZTNA, Red team, dedicated CISO |
| Series C+ | $50M+ | 4–6% revenue | +SOC, threat intelligence, M&A security |
Non-negotiables regardless of stage:
- MFA on everything (particularly email, cloud consoles, code repos)
- Automated backups with tested restore (ransomware defense)
- Secrets management (no hardcoded credentials)
- Dependency vulnerability scanning in CI/CD
- Incident response plan (even a 2-page doc is better than nothing)
4. Security Program Maturity Model
Based on NIST CSF and CMMI, simplified for startup context:
Level 1: Initial
- No formal policies
- Reactive security (respond to incidents, not prevent them)
- No dedicated security personnel
- Basic hygiene gaps (unpatched systems, shared passwords)
- Typical: Pre-seed, <20 employees
Level 2: Developing
- Written security policies (even if not fully followed)
- Dedicated security responsibility (often part-time or dual-role)
- MFA deployed, basic asset inventory
- Incident response process documented
- SOC 2 Type I achievable from here in ~6 months
- Typical: Series A, 20–50 employees
Level 3: Defined
- Security integrated into SDLC
- Dedicated security lead or vCISO
- Regular vulnerability scanning and patching
- Security awareness training program
- SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 achievable
- Typical: Series B, 50–150 employees
Level 4: Managed
- Risk-based security program with quantified risks
- Security metrics reported to board quarterly
- Threat intelligence program
- Dedicated security team (3–8 people)
- Red team / penetration testing annually
- Typical: Series C+, 150–500 employees
Level 5: Optimized
- Continuous monitoring and automated response
- Proactive threat hunting
- Industry leadership on security (bug bounty, disclosure program)
- Security as competitive advantage in sales
- Typical: Public company or regulated enterprise
Maturity Assessment Questions
- Can you list all systems that process customer data right now?
- How long would it take to detect if an admin credential was compromised?
- When was your last backup tested with a restore?
- Do developers run any security checks before code is deployed?
- Does the board receive security reporting? What's in it?
Score: 0 = no/don't know, 1 = partially, 2 = yes/verified
- 0–3: Level 1–2
- 4–7: Level 2–3
- 8–10: Level 3–4
5. Board-Level Security Reporting
What the Board Cares About
Boards are not interested in CVE counts or firewall rules. They care about:
- Risk posture: Are we getting better or worse?
- Regulatory exposure: What fines could we face?
- Incident readiness: If we're breached, are we prepared?
- Competitive position: Do customers trust us with their data?
- Budget adequacy: Are we investing appropriately?
Quarterly Board Security Report Structure
Executive Summary (1 page max)
- Security posture score vs. last quarter (directional trend matters more than absolute)
- Top 3 risks and their business impact in dollars
- Key accomplishments this quarter
- Investment requested (if any)
Risk Dashboard
Risk Register Summary:
├── Critical (>$500K ALE): [count] risks, [count] mitigated
├── High ($100K–$500K ALE): [count] risks, [count] mitigated
├── Medium ($10K–$100K ALE): [count] risks
└── Low (<$10K ALE): [count] risks (for awareness only)
Trend: ↑ Risk exposure vs. Q[n-1] / ↓ Risk exposure vs. Q[n-1]
Compliance Status
- Framework certifications in scope and current status
- Next audit date
- Any findings from last audit and remediation status
Incident Summary
- Security incidents last quarter (count and severity)
- Time to detect / time to respond (vs. targets)
- Any regulatory reporting obligations triggered
Key Metrics (4–6 max)
- MFA adoption rate
- Critical patch SLA compliance
- Phishing simulation click rate (trend)
- Vendor assessments completed
Budget Summary
- Spend vs. budget
- Headcount
- Next quarter key investments and rationale
Common Board Questions to Prepare For
- "Have we been breached?" (Know your detection capability, not just your answer)
- "How do we compare to peers?" (Benchmarks from Verizon DBIR, industry ISACs)
- "What's the one thing we should invest in?" (Have a clear answer)
- "If we're acquired, what would security due diligence find?" (Be honest)
- "What keeps you up at night?" (Have a real answer, not a vague one)
6. Security as Revenue Enabler
The Sales Angle
For B2B companies, security certifications directly impact revenue:
- Enterprise buyers require SOC 2 as table stakes (increasingly SOC 2 Type II)
- Government and healthcare require ISO 27001 or HIPAA
- Passing security questionnaires faster closes deals faster
- A breach costs 10–30% customer churn; security investment is churn prevention
How to Measure:
- Deals blocked by security questionnaire failures (track in CRM)
- Average security questionnaire turnaround time
- Customer security reviews passed vs. failed
- Revenue attributed to new compliance certifications
The Trust Narrative
Position security certifications in marketing:
- SOC 2 Type II: "Independently audited security controls, verified annually"
- ISO 27001: "Internationally certified information security management"
- HIPAA BAA: "Healthcare data protection to regulatory standards"
These aren't just compliance — they're trust signals that compress the sales cycle.