Skip to content
Back to skills

Defense Threat Modeling

ASecurity

Threat-model a system or feature (STRIDE + attack trees) to find design-level risk before code. Load on "threat model", a new design/architecture review, security design questions, or planning controls. Signals: architecture diagram, data-flow, "what could go wrong", pre-build security.

  • 20 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 22, 2026
ai-agentsrustgosecurity

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 22, 2026

npx -y skills add NoorQureshi/SploitAgent --skill defense-threat-modeling --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Defense Threat Modeling?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Defense Threat Modeling
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/noorqureshi-defense-threat-modeling/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/noorqureshi-defense-threat-modeling)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: defense-threat-modeling
description: >
  Threat-model a system or feature (STRIDE + attack trees) to find design-level risk before code.
  Load on "threat model", a new design/architecture review, security design questions, or planning
  controls. Signals: architecture diagram, data-flow, "what could go wrong", pre-build security.
domain: defense
type: methodology
stability: learning
modes: [defense]
severity: info
schema_version: 1
---

# Threat modeling (STRIDE + attack trees)

## When it applies
Before or during design — a new feature, service, or architecture — to find what can go wrong at
the design level, where fixes are cheapest. Pairs offense knowledge with a structured method.

## Why it works
Most breaches exploit design gaps, not just code bugs. Systematically walking each component and
data flow against a threat taxonomy surfaces missing controls (authz, validation, isolation) that
ad-hoc review misses, and produces a prioritized list of controls and tests.

## Method
1. **Model the system**: draw the data-flow diagram — external entities, processes, data stores,
   and trust boundaries (where data crosses privilege levels). The boundaries are where threats concentrate.
2. **Enumerate threats per element with STRIDE**:
   - **S**poofing (authn), **T**ampering (integrity), **R**epudiation (logging),
     **I**nformation disclosure (confidentiality), **D**enial of service (availability),
     **E**levation of privilege (authz).
3. **Attack trees** for high-value targets: root = attacker goal, branches = paths; map each to a
   real technique (link the relevant SploitAgent offensive skill).
4. **Rate & prioritize**: likelihood × impact (or DREAD); focus on trust-boundary crossings.
5. **Define controls & tests**: for each accepted threat, a mitigation and a test/detection
   (→ `defense-hardening-baseline`, `defense-detection-sigma`).

## Anti-patterns
- Modeling implementation detail instead of trust boundaries — boundaries are where risk lives.
- A threat list with no owner, control, or test — it must produce actionable, tracked mitigations.
- One-and-done — re-model when the design changes.

## Verify
A DFD with trust boundaries, a STRIDE-derived threat list, and for each significant threat a
mitigation + a validation test/detection.

## References
Shostack "Threat Modeling"; Microsoft STRIDE; OWASP Threat Modeling Cheat Sheet.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…