audit-frameworks

name

audit-frameworks

description

Audit Cartography's rules and compliance frameworks under `cartography/rules/data/rules/`. Surfaces TODOs that the schema can now satisfy, per-provider rules that should collapse into one ontology rule, and duplicate detections across frameworks (CIS, ISO 27001, SOC 2, NIST). Use when the user asks to "audit frameworks", "audit rules", "review rule TODOs", "find duplicate rules", "find ontology candidates", "consolidate compliance frameworks", or "map ISO/SOC2 onto CIS".

audit-frameworks

A read-only audit of cartography/rules/data/rules/. Produces a structured report with concrete consolidation proposals; does NOT modify rules unless the user explicitly approves a follow-up.

The audit covers four dimensions:

1. TODO triage: every # TODO: ... in a rule file annotates a control that could not be implemented at the time. Re-check whether the schema now exposes the missing data.
2. Cross-provider to ontology: find rule clusters that have one fact per provider but could collapse into a single fact using ontology semantic labels (UserAccount, Database, ObjectStorage, etc.).
3. Duplicate rules: find rules across different framework files that detect the same condition.
4. Framework consolidation: when duplicates exist, keep the rule from the most technical framework (CIS, NIST 800-53) and map the compliance frameworks (ISO 27001, SOC 2) onto it via frameworks=.

Critical rules

1. Audit only. Emit a report. Do not delete rules, change __init__.py, or rewrite Cypher without explicit user confirmation per finding.
2. Cite file and line for every finding. The user must be able to jump straight to the code.
3. Prefer the technical framework. When consolidating, CIS and NIST 800-53 keep the rule; ISO 27001, SOC 2, PCI DSS get added to that rule's frameworks tuple.
4. Same detection is not the same as same control. Two rules can share a Cypher pattern but enforce different controls (e.g. encryption-at-rest vs encryption-in-transit). Verify the description and the WHERE clause before flagging a duplicate.
5. Framework control titles are not rule names. Rule.name describes the Cartography security detection; Framework.control_title describes the external framework control or requirement. Many rules may map to the same framework control.
6. Never reference closed-source platforms or tickets in the audit report or in any rule change. Cartography is open source.

Inputs

• cartography/rules/data/rules/: every *.py file is in scope.
• cartography/rules/data/rules/__init__.py: registration map.
• cartography/rules/spec/model.py: Rule, Fact, Framework, Module, Maturity definitions.
• cartography/models/<provider>/: declarative schema. Drives the TODO triage.
• cartography/models/ontology/mapping/data/ and docs/root/modules/ontology/schema.md: semantic labels and _ont_* properties. Drives the ontology-collapse pass.
• cartography-rules list, cartography-rules frameworks: quick inventory.

Instructions

Step 1: inventory

Build a working set before analysing:

cartography-rules list
cartography-rules frameworks
grep -rn "TODO\|FIXME" cartography/rules/data/rules/

For each rule file, record:

• file path
• rule ids declared (grep -E '^[a-z0-9_]+ = Rule\(')
• frameworks attached (grep -A6 'frameworks=' <file>)
• modules touched (parse module=Module.<X> per fact)

Keep this inventory in the working report; later steps refer back to it.

Step 2: TODO triage

For every TODO comment in scope (typical form: # TODO: CIS K8s 1.1.1: ... followed by # Missing datamodel: <thing>):

1. Parse the TODO: extract the framework, the requirement id, and the "Missing datamodel" / "Missing datamodel or evidence" clause.
2. Probe the schema for the named gap. Examples:
   • "Missing datamodel: control plane host filesystem metadata for kube-apiserver manifest files" suggests searching cartography/models/kubernetes/ for a node with file-permission properties.
   • "Missing datamodel: initContainers and ephemeralContainers securityContext fields" suggests searching cartography/models/kubernetes/pod.py and friends for those fields.
3. Verdict per TODO:
   • IMPLEMENTABLE: schema now exposes the data; propose authoring the rule and link to the create-rule skill.
   • BLOCKED: schema still lacks the data; record the missing node/property names so the user can prioritise schema work.
   • OUTDATED: control is no longer relevant (e.g. CIS revision dropped it); propose deleting the TODO comment.

Do not author the implementable rules in this skill. Hand off to create-rule.

Step 3: cross-provider to ontology candidates

Goal: find rules whose facts repeat the same logic across providers but could be a single ontology fact.

1. Identify candidate rules: rules with 2+ facts where each fact targets a different provider node label and the Cypher patterns are structurally similar. Useful starting filter:

   grep -lE "module=Module\.(AWS|AZURE|GCP)" cartography/rules/data/rules/*.py \
     | xargs grep -lE "module=Module\.[A-Z]+" \
     | sort -u
   

2. Check ontology coverage: for each provider node in the rule's facts, confirm whether it carries a semantic label (UserAccount, Database, ObjectStorage, FileStorage, Tenant, DeviceInstance, etc.) and the _ont_* properties referenced in the existing query (typically _ont_email, _ont_source, _ont_public, etc.). If every relevant node is mapped, the rule is a strong collapse candidate.

3. Output: for each candidate emit:

   • rule id and file
   • facts that would be replaced
   • proposed ontology Cypher (one fact, module=Module.CROSS_CLOUD)
   • any provider-specific facts that should remain (e.g. provider-only attributes the ontology does not normalise)

4. Defer authoring: propose, do not write. Hand off to enrich-ontology if a node still needs to be mapped.

Step 4: duplicate detection

Two rules are duplicates when they detect the same condition on the same asset class, even if their ids, descriptions, or Cypher differ cosmetically. Cluster candidates by:

1. Shared Cypher signature: same MATCH labels, same load-bearing WHERE predicate (ignoring identifier renames).
2. Shared output identity field: both Findings expose the same asset_id_field (or equivalent).
3. Shared remediation intent: descriptions paraphrase each other.

Useful one-liners:

# pull every WHERE clause to spot near-duplicates
grep -nE "WHERE " cartography/rules/data/rules/*.py | sort -k2

# group rules by MATCH label
grep -nE "MATCH \([a-z]+:[A-Z]" cartography/rules/data/rules/*.py

Report each suspected duplicate as a tuple: {keeper_rule_id, duplicate_rule_id, file_paths, evidence} plus a confidence note (HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW).

Step 5: consolidation plan

For every HIGH-confidence duplicate cluster:

1. Pick the keeper in this priority order: CIS, then NIST 800-53, then NIST CSF / NIST AI RMF, then ISO 27001, then SOC 2, then PCI DSS, then custom. Tie-breaker: the rule with the more specific Cypher and richer Finding.
2. Plan the merge:
   • Add the duplicate's Framework(...) entries to the keeper's frameworks= tuple. Preserve name, short_name, scope, revision, requirement, and control_title exactly.
   • Delete the duplicate file or rule symbol.
   • Remove the duplicate's import + registration line from cartography/rules/data/rules/__init__.py.
   • If the duplicate had references the keeper lacks, merge them into the keeper's references= list.
3. Sanity check: keeper's module set still covers every provider the duplicate covered. If not, downgrade the merge to "needs an extra fact first" and stop.

Hand the plan to the user as a numbered list. Apply only after explicit confirmation, one cluster at a time.

Output report format

# Cartography rules audit, <YYYY-MM-DD>

## 1. TODO triage
- IMPLEMENTABLE (n)
  - <file>:<line>: CIS K8s 1.1.x. Schema now exposes <Node.property>. Author via the create-rule skill.
- BLOCKED (n)
  - <file>:<line>: needs <Node>/<property>. Suggest opening a schema task.
- OUTDATED (n)
  - <file>:<line>: control dropped in revision X.

## 2. Ontology collapse candidates
- <rule_id> (<file>): facts aws_*, azure_*, gcp_* could become a single Module.CROSS_CLOUD fact using :<SemanticLabel>.

## 3. Duplicate clusters
- HIGH: aws_public_rds_instances (<file>) vs iso27001_public_databases (<file>): same MATCH(:AWSRDSInstance) WHERE publicly_accessible=true.

## 4. Consolidation plan
1. Keep aws_public_rds_instances. Add Framework(short_name="ISO27001", requirement="A.13.1.1", control_title=..., ...). Remove iso27001_public_databases. Update __init__.py.
2. ...

Always end the report with Recommended next: ... listing the highest-impact item.

Examples

Example: TODO triage hit

User says: audit the cartography frameworks.

1. Inventory finds # TODO: CIS K8s 5.2.6: Partial control coverage. Missing datamodel or evidence: initContainers and ephemeralContainers securityContext fields.
2. Probe cartography/models/kubernetes/pod.py (or related). If init_containers is now a property with security_context fields, mark IMPLEMENTABLE.
3. Report references the new schema fields and points at the create-rule skill for authoring.

Example: ontology collapse

User says: find rules we can move to ontology only.

1. Find database_instance_exposed.py with three facts (RDS, Azure SQL, Cloud SQL).
2. Confirm all three node types carry the :Database semantic label and _ont_public property.
3. Propose a single Module.CROSS_CLOUD fact: MATCH (db:Database) WHERE db._ont_public = true RETURN db.id AS id, db._ont_source AS source.

Example: duplicate consolidation

User says: find duplicate rules across frameworks.

1. aws_s3_public_buckets and storage_public_exposure both MATCH (b:AWSS3Bucket) WHERE b.public = true.
2. Keeper: aws_s3_public_buckets. Action: append Framework(name="ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A", short_name="ISO27001", requirement="A.13.1.1", control_title="...") to its frameworks= tuple, delete storage_public_exposure, drop the import from __init__.py.
3. Wait for the user's go-ahead before editing.

Hand-offs

• Authoring a missing rule: create-rule skill.
• Mapping a provider node to a semantic label so an ontology collapse becomes possible: enrich-ontology skill.
• Adding the missing schema property surfaced by a BLOCKED TODO: add-node-type skill.

Common pitfalls

• Treating tags as frameworks. tags=("compliance", "cis:1.14") is legacy. Use frameworks=(Framework(...),) and keep tags for category labels only.
• Collapsing rules whose facts diverge in WHERE semantics. Public-network exposure and missing-encryption look similar in Cypher but are different controls; do not merge.
• Dropping the duplicate before updating __init__.py. The CLI inventory will break. Always edit __init__.py in the same change.
• Mapping ISO 27001 to a CIS rule that does not actually satisfy the ISO control. Read the ISO control text before claiming coverage; partial coverage means keep both rules and add a TODO instead.