Compliance Checker
When to activate
Use this skill when you need to:
- Map existing security controls to regulatory frameworks (GDPR, SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS, HIPAA)
- Audit your current security posture against compliance requirements
- Identify compliance gaps in your infrastructure or processes
- Generate a remediation roadmap with implementation priorities
- Prepare evidence for a compliance assessment or audit
- Evaluate whether a new tool, process, or change maintains compliance
Trigger scenarios:
- Expanding into a regulated market (healthcare, finance, EU)
- Preparing for an external audit or certification
- After a security incident, to verify compliance didn't break
- Before deploying a new feature that touches sensitive data
When NOT to use
- Legal interpretation required: If you need to understand ambiguous regulatory language or interpret case law, consult legal counsel — this skill maps known controls to known requirements, not edge cases
- One-off compliance question: If you just need "does GDPR require encryption?", ask directly instead of invoking the full skill
- Post-breach investigation: This skill maps controls to requirements; forensics and root-cause analysis are separate concerns
- Real-time threat response: During an active incident, focus on containment — compliance mapping comes after stabilization
- Vendor procurement decisions: Use this skill to define vendor compliance requirements, not to evaluate salespeople
Instructions
Step 1: Define Scope and Applicability
Before mapping controls, clarify:
Regulatory jurisdiction: Which frameworks apply?
- GDPR: EU/UK data processing
- HIPAA: US healthcare data (stricter than general data protection)
- PCI-DSS: Payment card data handling (any industry)
- SOC 2 Type II: Service organizations (auditor-driven)
- Others: Industry-specific (FedRAMP, FISMA, CCPA, etc.)
Data types and locations: What data does your system touch?
- Personal data (GDPR, CCPA)
- Health data (HIPAA)
- Payment card data (PCI-DSS)
- Regulated industry data (finance, government, etc.)
Scope boundaries: Which systems, teams, and processes are in scope?
- Cloud infrastructure vs. on-premises
- Third-party vendors and processors
- Development, staging, and production
Step 2: Inventory Existing Security Controls
Document what you already have:
| Control |
Current Implementation |
Evidence Location |
Owner |
| Encryption at rest |
(e.g., AES-256 in RDS) |
AWS console, IaC repo |
Platform team |
| Access control |
(e.g., IAM roles, MFA) |
Okta config |
Security team |
| Audit logging |
(e.g., CloudTrail) |
AWS account |
Ops team |
| ... |
... |
... |
... |
Use /security-audit or manual review to populate this table.
Step 3: Map Controls to Requirements
For each framework, cross-reference your controls against published requirements.
GDPR (Article-based):
- Article 5: Data subject rights and processor transparency
- Article 32: Technical and organizational measures (encryption, access, testing, monitoring)
- Article 33-35: Breach notification and DPIA
HIPAA (Rule-based):
- Administrative Safeguards: Workforce security, information access management
- Physical Safeguards: Facility access, workstation use and security
- Technical Safeguards: Access controls, encryption, audit controls, integrity controls
PCI-DSS (Requirement-based):
- 1-6: Infrastructure security
- 7-8: Access control and user identification
- 9-12: Monitoring, testing, and policies
SOC 2 Type II (Trust Service Criteria):
- CC (Common Criteria): Security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, privacy
- Each criterion has multiple sub-controls; attestation requires time-series evidence
Step 4: Identify Gaps
For each requirement, assess coverage:
| Requirement |
Required |
Current |
Gap |
Severity |
Evidence Gap |
| GDPR Art. 32: Encryption |
Required for PII |
AES-256 at rest; no TLS for internal comms |
TLS between services |
Medium |
No inventory of internal TLS |
| PCI-DSS 6.2: Security patches |
Monthly minimum |
Ad hoc patching every 2-3 months |
Automated patching SLA |
High |
No patch management policy |
| HIPAA Technical Safeguards: Audit logs |
All system activity |
CloudTrail + RDS logs only; no app logs |
App audit trail (who, what, when) |
Medium |
No centralized log collection |
| SOC 2 CC7.3: Prevent unauthorized data access |
Required |
IAM roles and MFA |
Attribute-based access control (ABAC) |
Low |
Meets current requirement |
Severity tiers:
- Critical: Failure exposes regulated data or violates legal requirement
- High: Creates material risk or audit finding; likely to fail certification
- Medium: Best practice gap or incomplete implementation; audit question likely
- Low: Recommended for mature programs; typically doesn't block certification
Step 5: Generate Remediation Roadmap
Prioritize by:
- Severity: Critical first, then High, Medium, Low
- Implementation cost: Quick wins first; defer expensive rewrites
- Dependencies: Some controls require others to be in place first
- Timeline: Audit dates, certification deadlines, regulatory deadlines
Roadmap template:
| # |
Control |
Gap |
Owner |
Timeline |
Effort |
Blockers |
Evidence Required |
| 1 |
Encrypt internal traffic (TLS) |
TLS between services |
Platform |
Q3 2026 |
2 weeks |
Cert management infra |
TLS cert audit, network capture |
| 2 |
Centralized audit logging |
App audit trail |
Eng + Ops |
Q3 2026 |
3 weeks |
Blocked by #1 |
Log ingestion setup, 6-month sample |
| 3 |
Automated patch management |
Patch SLA enforcement |
Ops |
Q4 2026 |
4 weeks |
Blocked by #2 |
Patch policy document, 12-month history |
Step 6: Build Evidence Inventory for Audit
Create a control-evidence mapping:
| Control |
Document Type |
Owner |
Refresh Cadence |
Location |
| IAM access control |
Policy doc + audit report |
Security |
Quarterly |
Security drive > IAM Policy.pdf + access-audit-Q2-2026.csv |
| Encryption at rest |
Architecture doc + test report |
Platform |
Annually |
Security drive > Encryption Standards.md |
| Incident response |
Playbook + post-mortems |
Security |
Ad hoc updates |
GitHub > security/incident-response.md |
Auditors ask for:
- Policies: Formal written requirements
- Evidence: Logs, screenshots, reports proving compliance
- Timelines: Dates showing sustained compliance (not one-off checks)
Example
Scenario: A US health tech startup preparing for SOC 2 Type II and HIPAA certification
Step 1: Scope
- Frameworks: HIPAA (health data) + SOC 2 Type II (service organization)
- Data: Patient records, genomic data, audit logs
- Scope: AWS cloud, three regions, third-party data processor
Step 2: Inventory
- Encryption: RDS encryption at rest (AES-256), but no TLS in transit
- Access: IAM roles + Okta SSO, but no MFA enforcement
- Logging: CloudTrail + RDS logs, but no application audit trail
- Backup: Daily snapshots, no tested restore procedure
Step 3: Map to Requirements
HIPAA Technical Safeguards § 164.312(a)(2):
- (i) Encryption and decryption → Partial: At rest ✓, in transit ✗
- (ii) Access controls → Partial: IAM ✓, MFA ✗, role audits ✗
SOC 2 CC6.1 (Logical access controls):
- "System is protected against unauthorized logical access" → Partial: MFA missing, no attribute-based access
Step 4: Gaps
| Requirement |
Current |
Gap |
Severity |
| HIPAA § 164.312(a)(2)(i): Encryption in transit |
TLS optional |
Enforce TLS for all data flows |
Critical |
| HIPAA § 164.312(a)(2)(ii): MFA |
Optional |
Enforce MFA for healthcare staff |
High |
| HIPAA § 164.312(b): Audit controls |
CloudTrail + DB logs |
Application audit trail (who accessed which records, when) |
High |
| SOC 2 CC6.2: User access provisioning |
Ad hoc Okta grants |
Formal approval workflow + quarterly access reviews |
Medium |
Step 5: Remediation Roadmap
| Priority |
Control |
Effort |
Timeline |
Evidence |
| 1 |
TLS everywhere |
2 weeks |
Q3 immediate |
TLS audit, network scan |
| 2 |
Enforce MFA |
1 week |
Q3 immediate |
Okta config, user enrollment report |
| 3 |
Application audit trail |
4 weeks |
Q3 |
Centralized logging setup, 6-month sample logs |
| 4 |
Access review workflow |
3 weeks |
Q4 |
Approval forms, quarterly review records |
Step 6: Evidence Collected for Auditors
- HIPAA Compliance Checklist: Filled in, signed by Security Officer
- Encryption Audit Report: Network capture showing TLS on all data flows
- IAM Access Report: Q2 2026 access review with manager sign-offs
- Audit Log Sample: 6 months of application + system logs proving "who did what when"
- Policies: Written HIPAA Security Rule implementation policy, MFA policy, incident response plan
Related Skills
/security-audit — Inventory and assess current security controls
/threat-modeling — Identify new threats; cross-reference against compliance gaps
/incident-response — When gaps are exploited; collect evidence for post-incident compliance
1---2name: compliance-checker3description: Compliance Checker4---5# Compliance Checker67## When to activate89Use this skill when you need to:10- Map existing security controls to regulatory frameworks (GDPR, SOC 2 Type II, PCI-DSS, HIPAA)11- Audit your current security posture against compliance requirements12- Identify compliance gaps in your infrastructure or processes13- Generate a remediation roadmap with implementation priorities14- Prepare evidence for a compliance assessment or audit15- Evaluate whether a new tool, process, or change maintains compliance1617Trigger scenarios:18- Expanding into a regulated market (healthcare, finance, EU)19- Preparing for an external audit or certification20- After a security incident, to verify compliance didn't break21- Before deploying a new feature that touches sensitive data2223## When NOT to use2425- **Legal interpretation required**: If you need to understand ambiguous regulatory language or interpret case law, consult legal counsel — this skill maps known controls to known requirements, not edge cases26- **One-off compliance question**: If you just need "does GDPR require encryption?", ask directly instead of invoking the full skill27- **Post-breach investigation**: This skill maps controls to requirements; forensics and root-cause analysis are separate concerns28- **Real-time threat response**: During an active incident, focus on containment — compliance mapping comes after stabilization29- **Vendor procurement decisions**: Use this skill to define vendor compliance requirements, not to evaluate salespeople3031## Instructions3233### Step 1: Define Scope and Applicability3435Before mapping controls, clarify:36371. **Regulatory jurisdiction**: Which frameworks apply?38 - GDPR: EU/UK data processing39 - HIPAA: US healthcare data (stricter than general data protection)40 - PCI-DSS: Payment card data handling (any industry)41 - SOC 2 Type II: Service organizations (auditor-driven)42 - Others: Industry-specific (FedRAMP, FISMA, CCPA, etc.)43442. **Data types and locations**: What data does your system touch?45 - Personal data (GDPR, CCPA)46 - Health data (HIPAA)47 - Payment card data (PCI-DSS)48 - Regulated industry data (finance, government, etc.)49503. **Scope boundaries**: Which systems, teams, and processes are in scope?51 - Cloud infrastructure vs. on-premises52 - Third-party vendors and processors53 - Development, staging, and production5455### Step 2: Inventory Existing Security Controls5657Document what you already have:5859| Control | Current Implementation | Evidence Location | Owner |60|---|---|---|---|61| Encryption at rest | (e.g., AES-256 in RDS) | AWS console, IaC repo | Platform team |62| Access control | (e.g., IAM roles, MFA) | Okta config | Security team |63| Audit logging | (e.g., CloudTrail) | AWS account | Ops team |64| ... | ... | ... | ... |6566Use `/security-audit` or manual review to populate this table.6768### Step 3: Map Controls to Requirements6970For each framework, cross-reference your controls against published requirements.7172**GDPR (Article-based)**:73- Article 5: Data subject rights and processor transparency74- Article 32: Technical and organizational measures (encryption, access, testing, monitoring)75- Article 33-35: Breach notification and DPIA7677**HIPAA (Rule-based)**:78- Administrative Safeguards: Workforce security, information access management79- Physical Safeguards: Facility access, workstation use and security80- Technical Safeguards: Access controls, encryption, audit controls, integrity controls8182**PCI-DSS (Requirement-based)**:83- 1-6: Infrastructure security84- 7-8: Access control and user identification85- 9-12: Monitoring, testing, and policies8687**SOC 2 Type II (Trust Service Criteria)**:88- CC (Common Criteria): Security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, privacy89- Each criterion has multiple sub-controls; attestation requires time-series evidence9091### Step 4: Identify Gaps9293For each requirement, assess coverage:9495| Requirement | Required | Current | Gap | Severity | Evidence Gap |96|---|---|---|---|---|---|97| GDPR Art. 32: Encryption | Required for PII | AES-256 at rest; no TLS for internal comms | TLS between services | Medium | No inventory of internal TLS |98| PCI-DSS 6.2: Security patches | Monthly minimum | Ad hoc patching every 2-3 months | Automated patching SLA | High | No patch management policy |99| HIPAA Technical Safeguards: Audit logs | All system activity | CloudTrail + RDS logs only; no app logs | App audit trail (who, what, when) | Medium | No centralized log collection |100| SOC 2 CC7.3: Prevent unauthorized data access | Required | IAM roles and MFA | Attribute-based access control (ABAC) | Low | Meets current requirement |101102Severity tiers:103- **Critical**: Failure exposes regulated data or violates legal requirement104- **High**: Creates material risk or audit finding; likely to fail certification105- **Medium**: Best practice gap or incomplete implementation; audit question likely106- **Low**: Recommended for mature programs; typically doesn't block certification107108### Step 5: Generate Remediation Roadmap109110Prioritize by:1111. **Severity**: Critical first, then High, Medium, Low1122. **Implementation cost**: Quick wins first; defer expensive rewrites1133. **Dependencies**: Some controls require others to be in place first1144. **Timeline**: Audit dates, certification deadlines, regulatory deadlines115116**Roadmap template**:117118| # | Control | Gap | Owner | Timeline | Effort | Blockers | Evidence Required |119|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|120| 1 | Encrypt internal traffic (TLS) | TLS between services | Platform | Q3 2026 | 2 weeks | Cert management infra | TLS cert audit, network capture |121| 2 | Centralized audit logging | App audit trail | Eng + Ops | Q3 2026 | 3 weeks | Blocked by #1 | Log ingestion setup, 6-month sample |122| 3 | Automated patch management | Patch SLA enforcement | Ops | Q4 2026 | 4 weeks | Blocked by #2 | Patch policy document, 12-month history |123124### Step 6: Build Evidence Inventory for Audit125126Create a control-evidence mapping:127128| Control | Document Type | Owner | Refresh Cadence | Location |129|---|---|---|---|---|130| IAM access control | Policy doc + audit report | Security | Quarterly | Security drive > IAM Policy.pdf + access-audit-Q2-2026.csv |131| Encryption at rest | Architecture doc + test report | Platform | Annually | Security drive > Encryption Standards.md |132| Incident response | Playbook + post-mortems | Security | Ad hoc updates | GitHub > security/incident-response.md |133134Auditors ask for:135- **Policies**: Formal written requirements136- **Evidence**: Logs, screenshots, reports proving compliance137- **Timelines**: Dates showing sustained compliance (not one-off checks)138139---140141## Example142143### Scenario: A US health tech startup preparing for SOC 2 Type II and HIPAA certification144145**Step 1: Scope**146- Frameworks: HIPAA (health data) + SOC 2 Type II (service organization)147- Data: Patient records, genomic data, audit logs148- Scope: AWS cloud, three regions, third-party data processor149150**Step 2: Inventory**151- Encryption: RDS encryption at rest (AES-256), but no TLS in transit152- Access: IAM roles + Okta SSO, but no MFA enforcement153- Logging: CloudTrail + RDS logs, but no application audit trail154- Backup: Daily snapshots, no tested restore procedure155156**Step 3: Map to Requirements**157158HIPAA Technical Safeguards § 164.312(a)(2):159- (i) Encryption and decryption → **Partial**: At rest ✓, in transit ✗160- (ii) Access controls → **Partial**: IAM ✓, MFA ✗, role audits ✗161162SOC 2 CC6.1 (Logical access controls):163- "System is protected against unauthorized logical access" → **Partial**: MFA missing, no attribute-based access164165**Step 4: Gaps**166167| Requirement | Current | Gap | Severity |168|---|---|---|---|169| HIPAA § 164.312(a)(2)(i): Encryption in transit | TLS optional | Enforce TLS for all data flows | Critical |170| HIPAA § 164.312(a)(2)(ii): MFA | Optional | Enforce MFA for healthcare staff | High |171| HIPAA § 164.312(b): Audit controls | CloudTrail + DB logs | Application audit trail (who accessed which records, when) | High |172| SOC 2 CC6.2: User access provisioning | Ad hoc Okta grants | Formal approval workflow + quarterly access reviews | Medium |173174**Step 5: Remediation Roadmap**175176| Priority | Control | Effort | Timeline | Evidence |177|---|---|---|---|---|178| 1 | TLS everywhere | 2 weeks | Q3 immediate | TLS audit, network scan |179| 2 | Enforce MFA | 1 week | Q3 immediate | Okta config, user enrollment report |180| 3 | Application audit trail | 4 weeks | Q3 | Centralized logging setup, 6-month sample logs |181| 4 | Access review workflow | 3 weeks | Q4 | Approval forms, quarterly review records |182183**Step 6: Evidence Collected for Auditors**184185- **HIPAA Compliance Checklist**: Filled in, signed by Security Officer186- **Encryption Audit Report**: Network capture showing TLS on all data flows187- **IAM Access Report**: Q2 2026 access review with manager sign-offs188- **Audit Log Sample**: 6 months of application + system logs proving "who did what when"189- **Policies**: Written HIPAA Security Rule implementation policy, MFA policy, incident response plan190191---192193## Related Skills194195- `/security-audit` — Inventory and assess current security controls196- `/threat-modeling` — Identify new threats; cross-reference against compliance gaps197- `/incident-response` — When gaps are exploited; collect evidence for post-incident compliance