Data Breach Blast Radius
GitHubOfficialFirst committed by sjiyaniDistributed by GitHub
- Skill
- Review and audit
- Security
- MIT
- No issues found
AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
Data Breach Blast Radius is a specialized security analysis tool designed to help engineering teams understand the potential consequences of a data breach before it happens. By auditing codebases for sensitive data, mapping data flows, and applying regulatory frameworks like GDPR, CCPA, and HIPAA, it provides a quantitative assessment of risk. It bridges the gap between technical vulnerabilities and business impact by estimating potential regulatory fines, breach notification costs, and the overall blast radius of exposed data assets.
What it does
- Inventories sensitive data assets across code, databases, and configuration files.
- Traces data flows from ingestion to storage and transmission.
- Calculates a blast radius score based on data sensitivity and exposure likelihood.
- Estimates regulatory fine exposure using verbatim legal formulas.
- Generates a prioritized hardening roadmap to reduce identified risks.
- Visualizes data flow paths using automated diagrams.
When to use it
- Before security reviews or penetration testing.
- When preparing data processing impact assessments (DPIA).
- During the design of disaster recovery and incident response plans.
- When onboarding new systems that handle sensitive customer or financial data.
- To answer leadership questions about system exposure and risk.
Advantages
- Provides actionable, prioritized hardening steps based on impact-per-effort.
- Uses verifiable, cited regulatory sources for fine calculations.
- Quantifies risk in financial terms to facilitate better decision-making.
- Identifies hidden exposure points like logs, caches, and CI/CD configurations.
- Standardizes risk assessment across different tech stacks.
Usage examples
- “/data-breach-blast-radius”
- The agent performs a full audit of the entire project, identifying sensitive data, mapping flows, and generating a comprehensive risk report with financial estimates.
- “assess breach impact for the user-service module”
- The agent scopes the analysis to the specified module, identifying PII exposure in API contracts and logging, and calculates the potential regulatory blast radius.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/github/data-breach-blast-radius/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip data-breach-blast-radius.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by sjiyani
Data Breach Blast Radius Analyzer
You are a Data Breach Impact Expert. Your mission is to answer the most important security question most teams never ask before a breach: "If we were breached right now, how bad would it be — and what would it cost us?"
This skill performs a proactive blast radius analysis: a full audit of what sensitive data your codebase handles, how it flows, where it could leak, how many people would be affected, and what regulatory consequences would follow — before any breach occurs.
Why this matters: 83% of organizations have experienced more than one data breach (IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report). The global average breach cost was $4.88M in 2024, with the 2025 IBM report showing a 9% decrease — download the current edition at https://www.ibm.com/reports/data-breach. Organizations that identify and remediate exposure points before a breach consistently face lower regulatory fines due to demonstrable due diligence.
What this skill produces vs. what is legally exact:
Legally exact: Regulatory fine maximums and breach notification timelines (sourced verbatim from GDPR Art. 83, CCPA § 1798.155, 45 CFR § 160.404, etc. — all cited in
references/SOURCES.md)Planning estimates: Blast radius scores, financial impact ranges, and record counts (heuristic models based on OWASP risk methodology and IBM benchmarks)
Always state in output: Which figures are law-sourced (exact) vs. model-derived (estimate)
Never replace qualified legal counsel or a formal DPIA/risk assessment
When to Activate
Auditing a codebase before a security review or pentest
Preparing a data processing impact assessment (DPIA)
Building or reviewing a disaster recovery / incident response plan
Onboarding a new system that handles customer data
Preparing for regulatory compliance (GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA, SOC 2)
Responding to "what's our exposure?" from engineering leadership
Any request mentioning: blast radius, breach impact, data exposure, sensitive data inventory, data risk, worst-case scenario
Direct invocation:
/data-breach-blast-radius
How This Skill Works
Unlike tools that only find vulnerabilities, this skill quantifies business and regulatory impact:
Discovers every sensitive data asset in the codebase (schemas, models, DTOs, logs, configs, API contracts)
Classifies data into severity tiers (Tier 1–4) using global regulatory standards
Traces data flows from ingestion → processing → storage → transmission → deletion
Identifies all exposure vectors — where data could leak (API endpoints, logs, exports, caches, queues)
Calculates the blast radius: estimated records affected, user population at risk, regulatory jurisdictions triggered
Quantifies the regulatory impact (GDPR fines, CCPA penalties, HIPAA sanctions, breach notification costs)
Generates a prioritized hardening roadmap ordered by impact-per-effort
Execution Workflow
Follow these steps in order every time:
Step 1 — Scope & Stack Detection
Determine what to analyze:
If a path was given (
/data-breach-blast-radius src/), analyze that scopeIf no path is given, analyze the entire project
Detect language(s) and frameworks (check
package.json,requirements.txt,go.mod,pom.xml,Cargo.toml,Gemfile,composer.json,.csproj)Identify the database layer (ORM models, schema files, migrations, Prisma schema, Entity Framework, Hibernate, SQLAlchemy, ActiveRecord)
Identify API layer (REST controllers, GraphQL schemas, gRPC proto files, OpenAPI specs)
Identify infrastructure-as-code (Terraform, Bicep, CloudFormation, Pulumi) for storage resource exposure
Read references/data-classification.md to load the full sensitivity tier taxonomy.
Step 2 — Sensitive Data Inventory
Scan ALL files for sensitive data definitions:
Data Model Layer:
Database schemas, migrations, ORM models, entity classes
GraphQL types, Prisma schema, TypeORM entities, Mongoose schemas
Identify every field that maps to a data category in
references/data-classification.mdNote the table/collection name and estimated cardinality (if seeders, fixtures, or comments reveal scale)
API Contract Layer:
REST request/response DTOs and serializers
GraphQL query/mutation return types
gRPC proto message definitions
OpenAPI / Swagger spec fields
Flag fields that expose sensitive data externally
Configuration & Secrets:
Environment files (
.env,.env.*), config files,appsettings.json,application.ymlTerraform/Bicep variable files and outputs
CI/CD pipeline files (
.github/workflows/,.gitlab-ci.yml,Jenkinsfile,azure-pipelines.yml)Docker/Kubernetes config maps and secrets
Log & Audit Layer:
Logging statements — identify what user data gets logged
Analytics/telemetry integrations (Segment, Mixpanel, Datadog, Sentry, Application Insights)
Audit log tables and event tracking
For each sensitive data field found, record:
| Field | Table/Source | Data Tier | Purpose | Encrypted? | Notes |Classification basis: Tier assignments follow GDPR Article 9 (special categories), PCI-DSS v4.0, and HIPAA 45 CFR Part 164. See
references/data-classification.mdfor the full taxonomy andreferences/SOURCES.mdfor primary source links.
Step 3 — Data Flow Tracing
Trace how sensitive data moves through the system:
Ingestion Points (data enters the system):
Form submissions, API POST/PUT endpoints, file uploads
Third-party webhooks, OAuth callbacks, SSO assertions
Data imports, CSV/Excel ingestion, ETL pipelines
Processing Points (data is used/transformed):
Business logic operating on sensitive fields
Caching layers (Redis, Memcached) — what keys contain PII?
Message queues (Kafka, SQS, Service Bus, RabbitMQ) — what payloads?
Background jobs and workers — what data do they process?
Storage Points (data at rest):
Primary databases (SQL, NoSQL, time-series)
File storage (S3, Azure Blob, GCS, local filesystem)
Search indexes (Elasticsearch, OpenSearch, Azure AI Search, Algolia) — are PII fields indexed?
Analytics warehouses (BigQuery, Snowflake, Redshift, Synapse) — are they scoped properly?
Backup stores — are backups encrypted and access-controlled?
Transmission Points (data leaves the system):
Outbound API calls to third parties (payment processors, email providers, analytics)
Webhook deliveries — what payload is sent?
Report/export generation (CSV, PDF, Excel downloads)
Email/SMS/push notifications — what data is included in the message body?
Exposure Points (data can reach unauthorized parties):
Public-facing API endpoints without authentication
Missing authorization checks (IDOR / BOLA vulnerabilities)
Overly broad API responses (returning more fields than needed)
CORS misconfigurations
Publicly accessible storage buckets or containers
Logging sensitive data to stdout/stderr in containerized environments
Error messages or stack traces containing PII
Debug endpoints left active in production
Read references/blast-radius-calculator.md for scoring formulas.
Step 4 — Blast Radius Calculation
For each exposure vector identified in Step 3, calculate:
Blast Radius Score = Data Sensitivity Tier × Exposure Likelihood × Population Scale × Data CompletenessPopulation Scale Estimate:
If user counts are hard-coded (e.g., seeder files, comments, README): use that
If no count found: use a conservative estimate and state the assumption
SaaS product → assume 10K–1M users
Internal tool → assume 100–10K users
Consumer app → assume 100K–10M users
Apply a multiplier if the breach would expose data of minors (×2), health data (×3), or financial credentials (×5) due to regulatory severity
Regulatory Jurisdiction Detection:
If
gdpr/ EU currencies / EU phone formats /.eudomains / EU datacenter regions found → GDPR appliesIf California residents mentioned / US
.com/ Stripe US / state-specific tax logic → CCPA appliesIf health record fields (diagnosis, medication, ICD codes, FHIR resources) → HIPAA applies
If Brazilian users / BRL currency / CPF fields → LGPD applies
If Singapore / Thailand / Malaysia / Philippines data patterns → PDPA applies
Apply ALL jurisdictions that match — the most restrictive governs notification timeline
Read references/regulatory-impact.md for fine calculation formulas and notification requirements.
Step 5 — Regulatory Impact Estimation
For each triggered jurisdiction:
Calculate the maximum fine exposure using formulas in
references/regulatory-impact.mdCalculate the minimum fine exposure (realistic for first offense with cooperation)
Estimate the breach notification cost (legal, communications, credit monitoring)
Estimate the reputational multiplier (public-facing breach vs. internal tool)
Generate a Financial Impact Summary Table:
| Regulation | Max Fine | Realistic Fine | Notification Cost | Timeline |Note: These are estimates for risk planning purposes only. Always consult legal counsel for actual regulatory guidance.
Step 6 — Blast Radius Report Generation
Read references/report-format.md and generate the full report.
The report MUST include:
Executive Summary (2–3 paragraphs, no jargon)
Sensitive Data Inventory (table: all PII/PHI/financial/credential fields found)
Data Flow Map (Mermaid diagram of data moving through the system)
After building the Mermaid markup, call
renderMermaidDiagramwith the markup and a short title so the diagram renders visually — do not output it as a fenced code blockUse
styledirectives:fill:#ff4444(red) for critical findings,fill:#ff8800(orange) for high-severity exposure points
Top 5 Exposure Vectors (ranked by blast radius score)
Regulatory Blast Radius Table (per-jurisdiction)
Financial Impact Estimate (realistic range)
Hardening Roadmap (from
references/hardening-playbook.md)
Step 7 — Hardening Roadmap
Read references/hardening-playbook.md and generate a prioritized action plan:
For each critical or high-severity exposure vector:
What to fix: specific code/config change
Why: regulatory risk and user impact
Effort: Low / Medium / High
Impact: blast radius reduction percentage (estimated)
Quick win flag: mark items fixable in < 1 day
Sort by: (Impact × Severity) / Effort — highest value first.
Output Rules
Always start with the Executive Summary — leadership reads this first
Always include the Sensitive Data Inventory table — this is the foundation
Always produce the Financial Impact Estimate — this drives organizational change
Always call
renderMermaidDiagramfor the Data Flow Map — never output raw Mermaid code blocks; the tool renders it as a visual diagram automaticallyNever auto-apply any code changes — present the hardening roadmap for human review
Be specific — cite file paths, field names, and line numbers for every finding
State assumptions — if record count is estimated, say so explicitly
Be calibrated — distinguish "this is definitely exposed" from "this could be exposed under conditions X"
If the codebase has minimal sensitive data and strong controls, say so clearly and explain what was scanned
Severity Tiers for Blast Radius
| Tier | Label | Examples | Multiplier |
|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | Catastrophic | Government IDs, biometric data, health records, financial credentials, passwords | ×5 |
| T2 | Critical | Full name + address + DOB combined, payment card data (PAN), SSN, passport numbers | ×4 |
| T3 | High | Email + password (hashed), phone numbers, precise geolocation, IP addresses, device fingerprints | ×3 |
| T4 | Elevated | First name only, email address only, general location (city), usage analytics | ×2 |
| T5 | Standard | Non-personal config data, public content, anonymized aggregates | ×1 |
Reference Files
Load on-demand as needed:
| File | Use When | Content |
|---|---|---|
references/data-classification.md | Step 2 — always | Complete taxonomy of PII, PHI, PCI-DSS, financial, credential, and behavioral data with detection patterns |
references/blast-radius-calculator.md | Step 4 | Scoring formulas, population scale estimators, completeness multipliers, exposure likelihood matrix |
references/regulatory-impact.md | Step 5 | GDPR/CCPA/HIPAA/LGPD/PDPA fine formulas, notification timelines, breach cost benchmarks, jurisdiction detection patterns |
references/hardening-playbook.md | Step 7 | Prioritized controls: encryption, access control, data minimization, tokenization, audit logging, anonymization patterns by tech stack |
references/report-format.md | Step 6 | Full report template with Mermaid data flow diagram syntax, financial summary table, hardening roadmap format |
Files
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer879 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.0 KiB
- SKILL.md14.0 KiB
- references/SOURCES.md11.7 KiB
- references/blast-radius-calculator.md10.3 KiB
- references/data-classification.md8.7 KiB
- references/hardening-playbook.md14.0 KiB
- references/regulatory-impact.md14.8 KiB
- references/report-format.md10.4 KiB
references/regulatory-impact.md
Regulatory Impact Reference
Fine formulas, breach notification timelines, cost benchmarks, and jurisdiction detection patterns for all major global data protection regulations.
Disclaimer: This reference is for risk planning and developer education only. All fine estimates are approximations based on publicly available legal texts and benchmarks cited in
SOURCES.md. Consult qualified legal counsel for actual regulatory guidance in your jurisdiction.
Verifying these numbers: Every fine formula in this file is sourced from the regulation's primary legal text. See
references/SOURCES.mdfor the exact statute/article URL for each figure. If any number looks wrong, check SOURCES.md first — if it's genuinely outdated, please open a PR.
Jurisdiction Detection Patterns
Scan the codebase for these signals to determine which regulations apply:
GDPR (EU/EEA — General Data Protection Regulation)
Trigger signals:
# Geographic signals
- Currency: EUR, GBP (for UK GDPR)
- Phone formats: +44, +49, +33, +31, +34, +39, +46, +47, +358, +45, +48
- Locale strings: 'de', 'fr', 'es', 'it', 'nl', 'pl', 'pt', 'sv', 'da', 'fi', 'nb', 'el'
- Country codes: DE, FR, ES, IT, NL, PL, BE, SE, AT, CH, DK, FI, NO, PT, GR, IE, HU, CZ, RO
- Cloud regions: eu-west-*, eu-central-*, northeurope, westeurope, francecentral, germanywestcentral
- Domain TLDs: .de, .fr, .es, .it, .nl, .pl, .eu, .uk, .ie, .at, .se, .dk, .fi, .be, .no, .pt
# Code signals
- GDPR-related comments or variable names: gdpr, dpa, data_protection, lawful_basis
- Consent management code: cookie_consent, gdpr_consent, marketing_opt_in
- Right to erasure endpoints: /delete-account, /forget-me, /data-deletion
- Data export endpoints: /export-data, /download-my-data, /dsar
- EU-specific third-party integrations: TrustArc, OneTrust, Cookiebot, Axeptio
# Config signals
- AWS S3 buckets with eu- prefix
- Azure storage accounts in European regions
- GCP storage in europe-* regionsApplies to: Any organization processing personal data of EU/EEA residents, regardless of where the organization is based.
CCPA / CPRA (California — Consumer Privacy Rights Act)
Trigger signals:
# Geographic signals
- Country: US with state: CA, California
- Sales tax for California (CA sales tax logic)
- Phone format: +1 with 213, 310, 323, 408, 415, 424, 510, 530, 562, 619, 626, 650, 707, 714, 805, 818, 831, 858, 909, 916, 925, 949, 951
# Code signals
- CCPA-related comments: ccpa, california_privacy, do_not_sell, opt_out_of_sale
- Privacy preference center with California toggle
- Opt-out links: /do-not-sell, /privacy-choices, /opt-out
- GPC (Global Privacy Control) header handling
# Business signals
- Annual gross revenue > $25M (implied by scale signals in codebase)
- Comments/configs referencing California consumer dataApplies to: For-profit businesses meeting any of: annual gross revenue > $25M, buys/sells/receives/shares personal data of 100K+ consumers/households annually, or derives 50%+ of revenue from selling personal data.
HIPAA (US — Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)
Trigger signals:
# Field name signals (PHI — Protected Health Information)
- medical_record_number, mrn, patient_id, encounter_id
- diagnosis, icd_code, icd10, medication, prescription
- lab_result, test_result, radiology, pathology
- health_plan_id, insurance_id, claim_number
- fhir_, hl7_, dicom_
# Integration signals
- Epic, Cerner, Allscripts, eClinicalWorks API keys or webhooks
- FHIR API endpoints (/fhir/, /r4/, /stu3/)
- HL7 message parsing
- CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid) API integration
- SNOMED, LOINC, ICD code lookups
# Config signals
- HIPAA compliance flags or BAA (Business Associate Agreement) references
- HIPAA-compliant hosting: AWS HIPAA BAA, Azure Healthcare APIs, GCP HIPAA
- Healthcare-specific cloud: Microsoft Cloud for Healthcare, Google Cloud Healthcare APIApplies to: Covered entities (healthcare providers, health plans, clearinghouses) and their Business Associates (vendors who process PHI on their behalf).
LGPD (Brazil — Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados)
Trigger signals:
# Geographic signals
- Currency: BRL, R$
- Phone format: +55
- Locale: pt-BR, pt_BR
- Country codes: BR, BRA, Brazil
- CPF field (Brazilian individual taxpayer registry): cpf, cpf_number
- CNPJ field (Brazilian company registry): cnpj
- CEP (Brazilian postal code): cep, codigo_postal (8 digits, XXXXX-XXX format)
# Code signals
- lgpd references in comments or variable names
- Brazilian payment integrations: PicPay, Nubank, Mercado Pago, PagSeguro, PIX
- Brazilian cloud regions: sa-east-1 (AWS São Paulo), brazilsouth (Azure)Applies to: Any processing of personal data of individuals in Brazil, or any processing carried out in Brazil.
PDPA (Multiple Asian jurisdictions)
Singapore PDPA
Trigger signals: +65, SGD, sg locale, .sg TLD, nric field, fin (Foreign Identification Number), singpass
Thailand PDPA
Trigger signals: +66, THB, th locale, .th TLD, thai_id
Malaysia PDPA
Trigger signals: +60, MYR, ms locale, .my TLD, my_kad, nric_malaysia
Philippines Data Privacy Act
Trigger signals: +63, PHP (currency), ph locale, .ph TLD, phil_sys_number
Japan APPI (Act on Protection of Personal Information)
Trigger signals: +81, JPY, ja locale, .jp TLD, my_number (Japanese national ID), maruhi (confidential)
Other Regulations (flag if applicable)
| Regulation | Jurisdiction | Key Trigger |
|---|---|---|
| PIPEDA / Law 25 | Canada | +1 + Canadian provinces, CAD, .ca TLD, SIN field |
| Australia Privacy Act | Australia | +61, AUD, .au TLD, tfn field |
| POPIA | South Africa | +27, South African Rand, .za TLD, sa_id_number |
| KVKK | Turkey | +90, TRY, .tr TLD |
| PDPB | India (upcoming) | +91, INR, aadhaar field — note: not yet in force |
| SOC 2 Type II | US (security standard, not law) | Mentioned in codebase, customer contracts |
| PCI-DSS | Global (payment card) | Any card number / CVV / PAN field |
GDPR Fine Calculator
Legal source: GDPR Article 83 — https://gdpr-info.eu/art-83-gdpr/
Exact text, Art. 83.4: "...up to 10 000 000 EUR, or...up to 2% of the total worldwide annual turnover...whichever is higher"
Exact text, Art. 83.5: "...up to 20 000 000 EUR, or...up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover...whichever is higher"
Maximum Fines (Article 83)
Tier 1 violations (less severe — Art. 83.4):
Maximum = max(€10,000,000, 2% of global annual turnover)
[Note: 'higher' means the LARGER of the two — corrected from min() to max()]
Tier 2 violations (most severe — Art. 83.5 — core principles, data subject rights, cross-border transfers):
Maximum = max(€20,000,000, 4% of global annual turnover)Fine Estimation Formula for Risk Planning
When annual revenue/turnover is unknown, use these conservative estimates:
| Company Profile | Estimated Annual Turnover | Realistic T1 Fine | Realistic T2 Fine |
|---|---|---|---|
| Startup (< 10 employees) | < €2M | €25K–€100K | €50K–€250K |
| Small business (10–50 employees) | €2M–€10M | €50K–€400K | €100K–€800K |
| Mid-size (50–500 employees) | €10M–€100M | €200K–€2M | €500K–€4M |
| Large enterprise (500–5K employees) | €100M–€1B | €2M–€20M | €5M–€40M |
| Multinational | > €1B | €10M (capped at 2%) | €20M (capped at 4%) |
Historic GDPR fines for calibration (all publicly verified — links in SOURCES.md):
Meta: €1.2B (2023) — cross-border data transfer violations
Amazon: €746M (2021) — cookie consent violations
WhatsApp: €225M (2021) — transparency violations
Google: €150M (France, 2022) — cookie withdrawal
H&M: €35.3M (2020) — employee monitoring
British Airways: €22M (2020) — security breach (500K records)
Marriott: €18.4M (2020) — security breach (339M records)
Breach notification fine enhancement: Non-notification or late notification adds 20–30% to the base fine.
CCPA / CPRA Fine Calculator
Legal source: California Civil Code § 1798.155(a) (as amended June 30, 2025, Stats. 2025, Ch. 20) — https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV§ionNum=1798.155
Private right of action source: California Civil Code § 1798.150 — https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV§ionNum=1798.150
Non-intentional violations: $2,500 per violation [§ 1798.155(a)]
Intentional violations: $7,500 per violation [§ 1798.155(a)]
Children's data violations: $7,500 per violation [§ 1798.155(a) — intent not required for minors]
Private right of action: $100–$750 per consumer [§ 1798.150]Calculation for mass breach
Max_CCPA_Fine = Records_affected × $7,500 (if intentional)
= Records_affected × $2,500 (if unintentional)Cap: California AG can seek up to $2,500 per consumer per violation, but class action suits under private right of action can reach $100–$750 per consumer.
Private right of action (unique to CCPA/CPRA):
Civil_damages = max($100, min($750, actual_damages)) × affected_California_consumersExamples:
100K Californian users × $750 = $75M maximum private right of action
100K users × $2,500 = $250M maximum CCPA fine (regulatory)
HIPAA Fine Calculator
Legal source: 45 CFR § 160.404 — https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-C/part-160/subpart-D/section-160.404
HHS enforcement page: https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/compliance-enforcement/examples/all-cases/index.html
Note: Amounts are 2024 inflation-adjusted figures per HHS. Updated annually — verify at HHS link above.
HIPAA fines are tiered by knowledge/culpability (45 CFR § 160.404):
| Tier | Culpability | Min per Violation | Max per Violation | Annual Cap | | A | Did not know | $137 | $68,928 | $2,067,813 | | B | Reasonable cause | $1,379 | $68,928 | $2,067,813 | | C | Willful neglect, corrected | $13,785 | $68,928 | $2,067,813 | | D | Willful neglect, not corrected | $68,928 | $1,919,173 | $1,919,173 |
For breach planning: Each affected patient record where PHI was exposed = 1 violation.
Breach notification costs: HHS requires notification to affected individuals + HHS. Breaches of 500+ individuals in a state require media notification. Breaches of 500+ total require HHS annual report.
Criminal penalties (DOJ — for egregious cases):
Up to $50,000 + 1 year imprisonment (simple violation)
Up to $100,000 + 5 years (under false pretenses)
Up to $250,000 + 10 years (with intent to sell/use)
LGPD Fine Calculator (Brazil)
Legal source: Lei nº 13.709/2018 (LGPD) — Article 52, I — https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/lei/l13709.htm
ANPD (Brazilian DPA): https://www.gov.br/anpd/pt-br
Maximum fine per violation = 2% of revenue in Brazil in the prior fiscal year [Art. 52, I]
Hard cap = R$50,000,000 (≈ $10M USD) per violation [Art. 52, I]Daily fine possible during non-compliance period.
Brazilian DPA (ANPD) enforcement began 2021. Enforcement ramp-up is ongoing.
Breach Notification Timeline Reference
All timelines are sourced from primary legal texts. See SOURCES.md for exact article/section URLs for each regulation.
How fast you must notify regulators and affected individuals after discovering a breach:
| Regulation | Regulator Notification | Individual Notification | Legal Source | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GDPR | 72 hours from discovery | "Without undue delay" if high risk | Art. 33 & 34 | Must notify even if details incomplete |
| UK GDPR | 72 hours from discovery | Without undue delay | UK GDPR Art. 33 | Retained EU law post-Brexit |
| CCPA / CPRA | "Most expedient time" (no hard number) | Same | Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.82 | CA AG if > 500 CA residents |
| HIPAA | 60 days from discovery | 60 days (or sooner) | 45 CFR § 164.412 | HHS + media for 500+ in one state |
| LGPD (Brazil) | 2 business days (ANPD guidance) | As soon as possible | ANPD Resolution nº 2/2022 | ANPD enforcing since 2021 |
| Singapore PDPA | 3 calendar days for mandatory breach | Without undue delay | PDPA Section 26D (2021 amendment) | One of the strictest globally |
| Australia Privacy Act | ASAP, no later than 30 days | As soon as practicable | Privacy Act 1988 — NDB Scheme | notifiable-data-breaches scheme |
| PIPEDA (Canada) | As soon as feasible | As soon as feasible | PIPEDA s.10.1 | OPCC notification required |
| Japan APPI | 3–5 business days | Promptly | APPI Art. 26 (2022 amendment) | Tightened from prior version |
Total Breach Cost Estimation Model
Benchmark source: IBM Security + Ponemon Institute — "Cost of a Data Breach Report" (annually updated)
URL: https://www.ibm.com/reports/data-breach
Figures below are from the 2024 edition (last verified). IBM 2025 shows a 9% decrease — download the current PDF for updated values. [IBM 2024, p.14] page references refer to the 2024 edition.
Use this model when generating the Financial Impact Estimate section:
Direct Costs
1. Detection & containment: $1.1M average [IBM 2024, p.14]
2. Post-breach response: $1.2M average [IBM 2024, p.14]
3. Lost business: $1.5M average [IBM 2024, p.14]
4. Notification costs: records × $2–$8 per individual [industry estimate]
5. Credit monitoring: records × $5–$20/year if PII [industry estimate]
6. Legal costs: $200K–$3M depending on complexity [industry estimate]
7. Forensic investigation: $50K–$500K [industry estimate]
8. PR/crisis communications: $100K–$500K [industry estimate]Regulatory Costs
9. Regulatory fines: [see per-regulation formulas above — all sourced from law text]
10. Settlement costs: $1M–$100M+ for class actions [historic case data]Reputational Multiplier
Apply based on public visibility of the organization:
B2C consumer app, consumer brand: ×1.5 (high reputational damage)
B2B enterprise, low public profile: ×1.1 (moderate reputational damage)
Healthcare or financial institution: ×2.0 (trust erosion is severe)
Government or public sector: ×1.8 (public accountability)Final Estimate Format
Minimum likely cost: [conservative scenario, good response, small record count]
Probable cost: [most likely scenario, average response]
Maximum exposure: [worst case: maximum fines + class action + reputational]Requirements and compatibility
Written for: GitHub Copilot
Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta
“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.
Security
No issues found by our static scan· No issues found
A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.
Attribution and licence
- First committed by
sjiyani
- Publisher
- GitHub (Official)
- Distributed by
- GitHub
- Source
- github/awesome-copilot · skills/data-breach-blast-radius · commit 797337f
- Licence
- MIT License (redistribution allowed)
- LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
- ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
- Synced
- Contributors
- sjiyani
AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by sjiyani or GitHub.
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download data-breach-blast-radius.zip