implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla
Vulnerability remediation SLAs define mandatory timeframes for patching or mitigating identified vulnerabilities based on severity, asset criticality, and exploit availability. Effective SLA programs
Best use case
implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Vulnerability remediation SLAs define mandatory timeframes for patching or mitigating identified vulnerabilities based on severity, asset criticality, and exploit availability. Effective SLA programs
Teams using implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla Compares
| Feature / Agent | implementing-vulnerability-remediation-sla | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Vulnerability remediation SLAs define mandatory timeframes for patching or mitigating identified vulnerabilities based on severity, asset criticality, and exploit availability. Effective SLA programs
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Implementing Vulnerability Remediation SLA ## Overview Vulnerability remediation SLAs define mandatory timeframes for patching or mitigating identified vulnerabilities based on severity, asset criticality, and exploit availability. Effective SLA programs drive accountability, ensure consistent remediation timelines, and provide measurable KPIs for vulnerability management maturity. ## When to Use - When deploying or configuring implementing vulnerability remediation sla capabilities in your environment - When establishing security controls aligned to compliance requirements - When building or improving security architecture for this domain - When conducting security assessments that require this implementation ## Prerequisites - Vulnerability scanning program producing regular findings - Asset inventory with criticality classifications - Ticketing system (Jira, ServiceNow, etc.) for remediation tracking - Executive sponsorship for SLA enforcement - Cross-functional agreement from IT operations, development, and security ## Core Concepts ### SLA Framework Components 1. **Severity Classification**: CVSS base score + threat context (EPSS, KEV) 2. **Asset Tiering**: Business criticality and exposure level 3. **Remediation Timeframes**: Maximum days to remediate by category 4. **Exception Process**: Documented approval for SLA extensions 5. **Escalation Procedures**: Actions when SLAs are breached 6. **Metrics and Reporting**: KPIs for compliance tracking ### Recommended SLA Matrix | Severity | Tier 1 (Critical) | Tier 2 (Important) | Tier 3 (Standard) | |----------|-------------------|--------------------|--------------------| | Critical (CVSS 9.0-10.0) | 24-48 hours | 72 hours | 7 days | | High (CVSS 7.0-8.9) | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | | Medium (CVSS 4.0-6.9) | 30 days | 45 days | 60 days | | Low (CVSS 0.1-3.9) | 90 days | 90 days | 90 days | | CISA KEV Listed | 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | ### SLA Accelerators (Reduce SLA by 50%) - Exploit code publicly available - Active exploitation observed in the wild (CISA KEV) - Internet-facing asset affected - EPSS score > 0.5 (50% exploitation probability) - Previous breach via similar vulnerability type ## Workflow ### Step 1: Define Asset Tiers ``` Tier 1 (Critical Assets): - Customer-facing production systems - Payment processing infrastructure - Domain controllers and identity systems - Core network infrastructure (firewalls, routers) - Databases containing PII/PHI/PCI data Tier 2 (Important Assets): - Internal production applications - Email and collaboration systems - Development/staging environments with production data - Backup and recovery infrastructure - VPN and remote access gateways Tier 3 (Standard Assets): - End-user workstations - Development/test environments - Print servers and peripheral management - Non-critical internal tools ``` ### Step 2: Establish SLA Policy Document Key sections to include: - Purpose and scope - Roles and responsibilities (RACI matrix) - Severity definitions and calculation method - Remediation timeframes by severity and asset tier - Exception request process and approval authority - Escalation procedures for SLA breaches - Metrics, reporting cadence, and governance - Policy review and update schedule ### Step 3: Integrate with Ticketing System ```python # ServiceNow / Jira integration for automatic ticket creation # See process.py for full implementation # Key fields for remediation tickets: # - Vulnerability ID (CVE/Plugin ID) # - Affected host(s) # - Severity (CVSS + contextual factors) # - Asset tier # - SLA deadline (calculated from discovery date) # - Assignment group # - Remediation instructions # - Verification criteria ``` ### Step 4: Configure Escalation Chain ``` SLA Status Action Notify ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── 75% elapsed Warning email Asset owner 100% elapsed SLA breach notification Manager + CISO 100% + 7 days Executive escalation VP/CTO 100% + 30 days Risk acceptance required CISO approval 100% + 90 days Compensating controls mandatory Board report ``` ### Step 5: Establish Exception Process Valid exception reasons: - System cannot be patched without major downtime (scheduled maintenance window) - No vendor patch available (apply compensating controls) - Patch breaks critical functionality (require test results as evidence) - End-of-life system pending decommission (document risk acceptance) Exception requirements: - Written justification with business impact - Compensating controls documented and implemented - Approved by asset owner AND security leadership - Maximum exception duration: 90 days (renewable with re-approval) - Tracked in vulnerability management platform ## Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) ### Primary Metrics | KPI | Definition | Target | |-----|-----------|--------| | SLA Compliance Rate | % of vulns remediated within SLA | >90% | | Mean Time to Remediate (MTTR) | Average days from discovery to fix | Critical: <3d, High: <10d | | Vulnerability Backlog | Open vulnerabilities past SLA | <5% of total | | Exception Rate | % of findings with active exceptions | <10% | | Recurrence Rate | % of vulns that reappear after remediation | <5% | ### Trending Metrics - Month-over-month SLA compliance trend - MTTR trend by severity - Vulnerability density per asset (vulns/host) - Patch coverage rate (% of assets scanned and compliant) - Time to first response (acknowledgment of finding) ## Best Practices 1. Start with achievable SLAs and tighten over time as maturity improves 2. Use automated ticketing to eliminate manual SLA tracking 3. Provide remediation teams with clear fix instructions, not just CVE numbers 4. Track SLA compliance at the team/department level for accountability 5. Report SLA metrics to executive leadership monthly 6. Include compensating controls as valid interim remediation 7. Align SLAs with regulatory requirements (PCI DSS, HIPAA, SOX) 8. Review and adjust SLAs annually based on threat landscape changes ## Common Pitfalls - Setting unrealistic SLAs that teams cannot meet (creates SLA fatigue) - No executive enforcement of SLA breaches - Treating all assets equally without tiering - Not accounting for vulnerability context (EPSS, KEV) in SLA calculation - Missing exception management process (leads to untracked risk) - Measuring only compliance rate without analyzing root causes of breaches ## Related Skills - prioritizing-vulnerabilities-with-cvss-scoring - implementing-patch-management-workflow - implementing-vulnerability-metrics-and-reporting - implementing-exception-management-process
Related Skills
testing-api-for-mass-assignment-vulnerability
Tests APIs for mass assignment (auto-binding) vulnerabilities where clients can modify object properties they should not have access to by including additional parameters in API requests. The tester identifies writable endpoints, adds undocumented fields to request bodies (role, isAdmin, price, balance), and checks if the server binds these to the data model without filtering. Part of OWASP API3:2023 Broken Object Property Level Authorization. Activates for requests involving mass assignment testing, parameter binding abuse, auto-binding vulnerability, or API over-posting.
substrate-vulnerability-scanner
Scans Substrate/Polkadot pallets for 7 critical vulnerabilities including arithmetic overflow, panic DoS, incorrect weights, and bad origin checks. Use when auditing Substrate runtimes or FRAME pallets. (project, gitignored)
performing-web-application-vulnerability-triage
Triage web application vulnerability findings from DAST/SAST scanners using OWASP risk rating methodology to separate true positives from false positives and prioritize remediation.
performing-vulnerability-scanning-with-nessus
Performs authenticated and unauthenticated vulnerability scanning using Tenable Nessus to identify known vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, default credentials, and missing patches across network infrastructure, servers, and applications. The scanner correlates findings with CVE databases and CVSS scores to produce prioritized remediation guidance. Activates for requests involving vulnerability scanning, Nessus assessment, patch compliance checking, or automated vulnerability detection.
performing-ssrf-vulnerability-exploitation
Test for Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerabilities by probing cloud metadata endpoints, internal network services, and protocol handlers through user-controllable URL parameters. Tests AWS/GCP/Azure metadata APIs (169.254.169.254), internal port scanning via HTTP, URL scheme bypass techniques, and DNS rebinding detection.
performing-ot-vulnerability-scanning-safely
Perform vulnerability scanning in OT/ICS environments safely using passive monitoring, native protocol queries, and carefully controlled active scanning with Tenable OT Security to identify vulnerabilities without disrupting industrial processes or crashing legacy controllers.
performing-ot-vulnerability-assessment-with-claroty
This skill covers performing vulnerability assessments in OT environments using the Claroty xDome platform for comprehensive asset discovery, risk scoring, vulnerability correlation, and remediation prioritization. It addresses passive vulnerability identification through traffic analysis, active safe querying of OT devices, integration with CVE databases and ICS-CERT advisories, and risk-based prioritization that accounts for operational impact and compensating controls.
performing-endpoint-vulnerability-remediation
Performs vulnerability remediation on endpoints by prioritizing CVEs based on risk scoring, deploying patches, applying configuration changes, and validating fixes. Use when remediating findings from vulnerability scans, responding to critical CVE advisories, or maintaining endpoint compliance with patch management SLAs. Activates for requests involving vulnerability remediation, CVE patching, endpoint vulnerability management, or security fix deployment.
performing-authenticated-vulnerability-scan
Authenticated (credentialed) vulnerability scanning uses valid system credentials to log into target hosts and perform deep inspection of installed software, patches, configurations, and security sett
performing-agentless-vulnerability-scanning
Configure and execute agentless vulnerability scanning using network protocols, cloud snapshot analysis, and API-based discovery to assess systems without installing endpoint agents.
performing-active-directory-vulnerability-assessment
Assess Active Directory security posture using PingCastle, BloodHound, and Purple Knight to identify misconfigurations, privilege escalation paths, and attack vectors.
implementing-zero-trust-with-hashicorp-boundary
Implement HashiCorp Boundary for identity-aware zero trust infrastructure access management with dynamic credential brokering, session recording, and Vault integration.