Compliance Audit
Systematic regulatory compliance auditing with automated evidence collection, control mapping,
gap analysis, and remediation planning across major compliance frameworks.
When to Use This Skill
- Conducting compliance assessments for GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2, or ISO 27001
- Preparing for external audits or certifications
- Building or validating compliance control frameworks
- Automating evidence collection and audit trail maintenance
- Performing gap analysis against regulatory requirements
- Creating remediation plans for compliance deficiencies
- Evaluating third-party vendor compliance posture
Quick Reference
| Resource |
Purpose |
Load when |
references/frameworks.md |
Key requirements, control mappings, and certification paths for GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2, ISO 27001 |
Scoping which regulations apply |
references/evidence-collection.md |
Automated evidence gathering, artifact organization, retention policies, audit trail patterns |
Setting up or running evidence collection |
references/gap-analysis.md |
Control mapping methodology, gap identification, risk scoring, remediation planning |
Analyzing compliance gaps |
Workflow Overview
Phase 1: Scope → Identify applicable regulations, data types, and geographical scope
Phase 2: Assess → Map controls, review policies, analyze data flows, test implementations
Phase 3: Evidence → Collect and organize audit artifacts automatically
Phase 4: Gap Analyze → Identify control gaps, score risks, prioritize findings
Phase 5: Remediate → Create remediation plans, assign owners, set timelines
Phase 6: Report → Generate audit-ready documentation and compliance dashboards
Phase 7: Monitor → Establish continuous compliance monitoring and drift detection
Phase 1: Scope the Audit
Determine the regulatory landscape before testing anything.
Key questions:
- What data types does the system process (PII, PHI, cardholder data)?
- What jurisdictions apply (EU, US states, industry-specific)?
- What existing controls and certifications are in place?
- What is the audit history and any prior findings?
Applicability matrix:
| Framework |
Applies when |
| GDPR |
Processing personal data of EU residents |
| HIPAA |
Handling protected health information (PHI) |
| PCI DSS |
Storing, processing, or transmitting cardholder data |
| SOC 2 |
Providing services where trust principles matter |
| ISO 27001 |
Organization wants certified ISMS |
| CCPA/CPRA |
Collecting California consumer personal information |
| NIST CSF |
Federal systems or voluntary cybersecurity framework adoption |
Phase 2: Assess Current State
Control Inventory
Map existing controls against the applicable framework requirements:
- Enumerate all technical controls (encryption, access control, logging)
- Enumerate all administrative controls (policies, training, procedures)
- Enumerate all physical controls (facility access, media handling)
- Map each control to specific framework requirements
- Test control effectiveness through sampling and verification
Data Flow Analysis
- Map data ingress, processing, storage, and egress points
- Identify data classification for each flow
- Document lawful basis for processing (GDPR)
- Verify data minimization and purpose limitation
- Review cross-border transfer mechanisms
Policy Review
- Assess policy coverage against framework requirements
- Verify policy distribution and acknowledgment
- Check policy version control and update cadence
- Validate exception management processes
Phase 3: Evidence Collection
Load references/evidence-collection.md for detailed patterns.
Automation priorities:
- Configuration exports from cloud providers and infrastructure
- Access control lists and permission matrices
- Log retention and monitoring dashboards
- Vulnerability scan results and patch status
- Training completion records
- Incident response test results
Artifact organization:
evidence/
{framework}/
{control-id}/
artifact-{date}.{ext}
metadata.yaml # source, collection method, timestamp
Phase 4: Gap Analysis
Load references/gap-analysis.md for the full methodology.
For each framework requirement:
- Map to existing controls (full, partial, or none)
- Assess implementation effectiveness
- Score the gap by risk impact and likelihood
- Categorize as documentation, process, technology, or training gap
- Prioritize based on risk score and remediation effort
Phase 5: Remediation Planning
For each identified gap:
| Field |
Content |
| Gap ID |
Unique identifier |
| Framework Requirement |
Specific clause or control |
| Current State |
What exists today |
| Target State |
What compliance requires |
| Remediation Action |
Specific steps to close the gap |
| Owner |
Responsible person/team |
| Priority |
P0-P4 based on risk score |
| Timeline |
Target completion date |
| Dependencies |
Other gaps or actions this depends on |
Phase 6: Reporting
Generate audit-ready documentation:
- Executive summary: Compliance posture, key risks, readiness score
- Technical findings: Detailed control assessment results
- Risk matrix: Heat map of gaps by severity and likelihood
- Remediation roadmap: Prioritized timeline with owners
- Evidence package: Organized artifacts indexed to controls
- Compliance attestation: Framework-specific certification readiness
Phase 7: Continuous Monitoring
Establish ongoing compliance posture management:
- Configure automated scanning for drift detection
- Set alert thresholds for control degradation
- Schedule periodic re-assessment cadence
- Track remediation progress against timelines
- Maintain metric dashboards (control coverage, evidence freshness, audit readiness)
Core Principles
- Evidence over assertion — every compliance claim must be backed by verifiable artifacts
- Automate first — manual evidence collection does not scale and introduces errors
- Risk-based prioritization — address the highest-risk gaps first
- Continuous posture — compliance is a state, not a one-time event
- Defense in depth — layer controls so single-point failures do not cause non-compliance
Anti-Patterns
- Treating compliance as a checkbox exercise without testing control effectiveness
- Collecting evidence manually when automation is available
- Ignoring gaps because "we've always done it this way"
- Waiting until audit season to gather evidence
- Conflating compliance with security (compliance is a subset)
- Skipping third-party/vendor compliance assessments
1---
2name: compliance-audit
3description: Regulatory compliance auditing across GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2, and ISO frameworks with automated evidence collection and gap analysis. Use when conducting compliance assessments, preparing for certifications, or implementing regulatory controls.
4version: 1.0.0
5tags:
6 - compliance
7 - audit
8 - regulatory
9 - security
10 - privacy
11triggers:
12 - compliance audit
13 - regulatory assessment
14 - GDPR compliance
15 - HIPAA assessment
16 - PCI DSS certification
17 - SOC 2 readiness
18 - ISO 27001 alignment
19 - evidence collection
20 - gap analysis
21dependencies:
22 skills:
23 - secure-coding-practices
24 - owasp-top-10
25 tools:
26 - Read
27 - Write
28 - Bash
29 - Grep
30 - Glob
31token_estimate: ~3000
32keywords:
33 - compliance audit
34 - GDPR
35 - HIPAA
36 - PCI DSS
37 - regulatory
38 - compliance
39 - audit
40---
41
42# Compliance Audit
43
44Systematic regulatory compliance auditing with automated evidence collection, control mapping,
45gap analysis, and remediation planning across major compliance frameworks.
46
47## When to Use This Skill
48
49- Conducting compliance assessments for GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2, or ISO 27001
50- Preparing for external audits or certifications
51- Building or validating compliance control frameworks
52- Automating evidence collection and audit trail maintenance
53- Performing gap analysis against regulatory requirements
54- Creating remediation plans for compliance deficiencies
55- Evaluating third-party vendor compliance posture
56
57## Quick Reference
58
59| Resource | Purpose | Load when |
60|----------|---------|-----------|
61| `references/frameworks.md` | Key requirements, control mappings, and certification paths for GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, SOC 2, ISO 27001 | Scoping which regulations apply |
62| `references/evidence-collection.md` | Automated evidence gathering, artifact organization, retention policies, audit trail patterns | Setting up or running evidence collection |
63| `references/gap-analysis.md` | Control mapping methodology, gap identification, risk scoring, remediation planning | Analyzing compliance gaps |
64
65---
66
67## Workflow Overview
68
69```
70Phase 1: Scope → Identify applicable regulations, data types, and geographical scope
71Phase 2: Assess → Map controls, review policies, analyze data flows, test implementations
72Phase 3: Evidence → Collect and organize audit artifacts automatically
73Phase 4: Gap Analyze → Identify control gaps, score risks, prioritize findings
74Phase 5: Remediate → Create remediation plans, assign owners, set timelines
75Phase 6: Report → Generate audit-ready documentation and compliance dashboards
76Phase 7: Monitor → Establish continuous compliance monitoring and drift detection
77```
78
79---
80
81## Phase 1: Scope the Audit
82
83Determine the regulatory landscape before testing anything.
84
85**Key questions:**
86- What data types does the system process (PII, PHI, cardholder data)?
87- What jurisdictions apply (EU, US states, industry-specific)?
88- What existing controls and certifications are in place?
89- What is the audit history and any prior findings?
90
91**Applicability matrix:**
92
93| Framework | Applies when |
94|-----------|-------------|
95| GDPR | Processing personal data of EU residents |
96| HIPAA | Handling protected health information (PHI) |
97| PCI DSS | Storing, processing, or transmitting cardholder data |
98| SOC 2 | Providing services where trust principles matter |
99| ISO 27001 | Organization wants certified ISMS |
100| CCPA/CPRA | Collecting California consumer personal information |
101| NIST CSF | Federal systems or voluntary cybersecurity framework adoption |
102
103---
104
105## Phase 2: Assess Current State
106
107### Control Inventory
108
109Map existing controls against the applicable framework requirements:
110
1111. Enumerate all technical controls (encryption, access control, logging)
1122. Enumerate all administrative controls (policies, training, procedures)
1133. Enumerate all physical controls (facility access, media handling)
1144. Map each control to specific framework requirements
1155. Test control effectiveness through sampling and verification
116
117### Data Flow Analysis
118
119- Map data ingress, processing, storage, and egress points
120- Identify data classification for each flow
121- Document lawful basis for processing (GDPR)
122- Verify data minimization and purpose limitation
123- Review cross-border transfer mechanisms
124
125### Policy Review
126
127- Assess policy coverage against framework requirements
128- Verify policy distribution and acknowledgment
129- Check policy version control and update cadence
130- Validate exception management processes
131
132---
133
134## Phase 3: Evidence Collection
135
136Load `references/evidence-collection.md` for detailed patterns.
137
138**Automation priorities:**
1391. Configuration exports from cloud providers and infrastructure
1402. Access control lists and permission matrices
1413. Log retention and monitoring dashboards
1424. Vulnerability scan results and patch status
1435. Training completion records
1446. Incident response test results
145
146**Artifact organization:**
147
148```
149evidence/
150 {framework}/
151 {control-id}/
152 artifact-{date}.{ext}
153 metadata.yaml # source, collection method, timestamp
154```
155
156---
157
158## Phase 4: Gap Analysis
159
160Load `references/gap-analysis.md` for the full methodology.
161
162For each framework requirement:
1631. Map to existing controls (full, partial, or none)
1642. Assess implementation effectiveness
1653. Score the gap by risk impact and likelihood
1664. Categorize as documentation, process, technology, or training gap
1675. Prioritize based on risk score and remediation effort
168
169---
170
171## Phase 5: Remediation Planning
172
173For each identified gap:
174
175| Field | Content |
176|-------|---------|
177| Gap ID | Unique identifier |
178| Framework Requirement | Specific clause or control |
179| Current State | What exists today |
180| Target State | What compliance requires |
181| Remediation Action | Specific steps to close the gap |
182| Owner | Responsible person/team |
183| Priority | P0-P4 based on risk score |
184| Timeline | Target completion date |
185| Dependencies | Other gaps or actions this depends on |
186
187---
188
189## Phase 6: Reporting
190
191Generate audit-ready documentation:
192
193- **Executive summary**: Compliance posture, key risks, readiness score
194- **Technical findings**: Detailed control assessment results
195- **Risk matrix**: Heat map of gaps by severity and likelihood
196- **Remediation roadmap**: Prioritized timeline with owners
197- **Evidence package**: Organized artifacts indexed to controls
198- **Compliance attestation**: Framework-specific certification readiness
199
200---
201
202## Phase 7: Continuous Monitoring
203
204Establish ongoing compliance posture management:
205
206- Configure automated scanning for drift detection
207- Set alert thresholds for control degradation
208- Schedule periodic re-assessment cadence
209- Track remediation progress against timelines
210- Maintain metric dashboards (control coverage, evidence freshness, audit readiness)
211
212---
213
214## Core Principles
215
2161. **Evidence over assertion** — every compliance claim must be backed by verifiable artifacts
2172. **Automate first** — manual evidence collection does not scale and introduces errors
2183. **Risk-based prioritization** — address the highest-risk gaps first
2194. **Continuous posture** — compliance is a state, not a one-time event
2205. **Defense in depth** — layer controls so single-point failures do not cause non-compliance
221
222## Anti-Patterns
223
224- Treating compliance as a checkbox exercise without testing control effectiveness
225- Collecting evidence manually when automation is available
226- Ignoring gaps because "we've always done it this way"
227- Waiting until audit season to gather evidence
228- Conflating compliance with security (compliance is a subset)
229- Skipping third-party/vendor compliance assessments