prowler-compliance

When to Use

Use this skill when:

• Creating a new compliance framework for any provider
• Adding requirements to existing frameworks
• Mapping checks to compliance controls
• Understanding compliance framework structures and attributes

Compliance Framework Location

Frameworks are JSON files located in: prowler/compliance/{provider}/{framework_name}_{provider}.json

Supported Providers:

• aws - Amazon Web Services
• azure - Microsoft Azure
• gcp - Google Cloud Platform
• kubernetes - Kubernetes
• github - GitHub
• m365 - Microsoft 365
• alibabacloud - Alibaba Cloud
• cloudflare - Cloudflare
• oraclecloud - Oracle Cloud
• oci - Oracle Cloud Infrastructure
• nhn - NHN Cloud
• mongodbatlas - MongoDB Atlas
• iac - Infrastructure as Code
• llm - Large Language Models

Base Framework Structure

All compliance frameworks share this base structure:

{
  "Framework": "FRAMEWORK_NAME",
  "Name": "Full Framework Name with Version",
  "Version": "X.X",
  "Provider": "PROVIDER",
  "Description": "Framework description...",
  "Requirements": [
    {
      "Id": "requirement_id",
      "Description": "Requirement description",
      "Name": "Optional requirement name",
      "Attributes": [...],
      "Checks": ["check_name_1", "check_name_2"]
    }
  ]
}

Framework-Specific Attribute Structures

Each framework type has its own attribute model. Below are the exact structures used by Prowler:

CIS (Center for Internet Security)

Framework ID format: cis_{version}_{provider} (e.g., cis_5.0_aws)

{
  "Id": "1.1",
  "Description": "Maintain current contact details",
  "Checks": ["account_maintain_current_contact_details"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "Section": "1 Identity and Access Management",
      "SubSection": "Optional subsection",
      "Profile": "Level 1",
      "AssessmentStatus": "Automated",
      "Description": "Detailed attribute description",
      "RationaleStatement": "Why this control matters",
      "ImpactStatement": "Impact of implementing this control",
      "RemediationProcedure": "Steps to fix the issue",
      "AuditProcedure": "Steps to verify compliance",
      "AdditionalInformation": "Extra notes",
      "DefaultValue": "Default configuration value",
      "References": "https://docs.example.com/reference"
    }
  ]
}

Profile values: Level 1, Level 2, E3 Level 1, E3 Level 2, E5 Level 1, E5 Level 2 AssessmentStatus values: Automated, Manual

ISO 27001

Framework ID format: iso27001_{year}_{provider} (e.g., iso27001_2022_aws)

{
  "Id": "A.5.1",
  "Description": "Policies for information security should be defined...",
  "Name": "Policies for information security",
  "Checks": ["securityhub_enabled"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "Category": "A.5 Organizational controls",
      "Objetive_ID": "A.5.1",
      "Objetive_Name": "Policies for information security",
      "Check_Summary": "Summary of what is being checked"
    }
  ]
}

Note: Objetive_ID and Objetive_Name use this exact spelling (not "Objective").

ENS (Esquema Nacional de Seguridad - Spain)

Framework ID format: ens_rd2022_{provider} (e.g., ens_rd2022_aws)

{
  "Id": "op.acc.1.aws.iam.2",
  "Description": "Proveedor de identidad centralizado",
  "Checks": ["iam_check_saml_providers_sts"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "IdGrupoControl": "op.acc.1",
      "Marco": "operacional",
      "Categoria": "control de acceso",
      "DescripcionControl": "Detailed control description in Spanish",
      "Nivel": "alto",
      "Tipo": "requisito",
      "Dimensiones": ["trazabilidad", "autenticidad"],
      "ModoEjecucion": "automatico",
      "Dependencias": []
    }
  ]
}

Nivel values: opcional, bajo, medio, alto Tipo values: refuerzo, requisito, recomendacion, medida Dimensiones values: confidencialidad, integridad, trazabilidad, autenticidad, disponibilidad

MITRE ATT&CK

Framework ID format: mitre_attack_{provider} (e.g., mitre_attack_aws)

MITRE uses a different requirement structure:

{
  "Name": "Exploit Public-Facing Application",
  "Id": "T1190",
  "Tactics": ["Initial Access"],
  "SubTechniques": [],
  "Platforms": ["Containers", "IaaS", "Linux", "Network", "Windows", "macOS"],
  "Description": "Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness...",
  "TechniqueURL": "https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1190/",
  "Checks": ["guardduty_is_enabled", "inspector2_is_enabled"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "AWSService": "Amazon GuardDuty",
      "Category": "Detect",
      "Value": "Minimal",
      "Comment": "Explanation of how this service helps..."
    }
  ]
}

For Azure: Use AzureService instead of AWSService For GCP: Use GCPService instead of AWSService Category values: Detect, Protect, Respond Value values: Minimal, Partial, Significant

NIST 800-53

Framework ID format: nist_800_53_revision_{version}_{provider} (e.g., nist_800_53_revision_5_aws)

{
  "Id": "ac_2_1",
  "Name": "AC-2(1) Automated System Account Management",
  "Description": "Support the management of system accounts...",
  "Checks": ["iam_password_policy_minimum_length_14"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "ItemId": "ac_2_1",
      "Section": "Access Control (AC)",
      "SubSection": "Account Management (AC-2)",
      "SubGroup": "AC-2(3) Disable Accounts",
      "Service": "iam"
    }
  ]
}

Generic Compliance (Fallback)

For frameworks without specific attribute models:

{
  "Id": "requirement_id",
  "Description": "Requirement description",
  "Name": "Optional name",
  "Checks": ["check_name"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "ItemId": "item_id",
      "Section": "Section name",
      "SubSection": "Subsection name",
      "SubGroup": "Subgroup name",
      "Service": "service_name",
      "Type": "type"
    }
  ]
}

AWS Well-Architected Framework

Framework ID format: aws_well_architected_framework_{pillar}_pillar_aws

{
  "Id": "SEC01-BP01",
  "Description": "Establish common guardrails...",
  "Name": "Establish common guardrails",
  "Checks": ["account_part_of_organizations"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "Name": "Establish common guardrails",
      "WellArchitectedQuestionId": "securely-operate",
      "WellArchitectedPracticeId": "sec_securely_operate_multi_accounts",
      "Section": "Security",
      "SubSection": "Security foundations",
      "LevelOfRisk": "High",
      "AssessmentMethod": "Automated",
      "Description": "Detailed description",
      "ImplementationGuidanceUrl": "https://docs.aws.amazon.com/..."
    }
  ]
}

KISA ISMS-P (Korea)

Framework ID format: kisa_isms_p_{year}_{provider} (e.g., kisa_isms_p_2023_aws)

{
  "Id": "1.1.1",
  "Description": "Requirement description",
  "Name": "Requirement name",
  "Checks": ["check_name"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "Domain": "1. Management System",
      "Subdomain": "1.1 Management System Establishment",
      "Section": "1.1.1 Section Name",
      "AuditChecklist": ["Checklist item 1", "Checklist item 2"],
      "RelatedRegulations": ["Regulation 1"],
      "AuditEvidence": ["Evidence type 1"],
      "NonComplianceCases": ["Non-compliance example"]
    }
  ]
}

C5 (Germany Cloud Computing Compliance Criteria Catalogue)

Framework ID format: c5_{provider} (e.g., c5_aws)

{
  "Id": "BCM-01",
  "Description": "Requirement description",
  "Name": "Requirement name",
  "Checks": ["check_name"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "Section": "BCM Business Continuity Management",
      "SubSection": "BCM-01",
      "Type": "Basic Criteria",
      "AboutCriteria": "Description of criteria",
      "ComplementaryCriteria": "Additional criteria"
    }
  ]
}

CCC (Cloud Computing Compliance)

Framework ID format: ccc_{provider} (e.g., ccc_aws)

{
  "Id": "CCC.C01",
  "Description": "Requirement description",
  "Name": "Requirement name",
  "Checks": ["check_name"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "FamilyName": "Cryptography & Key Management",
      "FamilyDescription": "Family description",
      "Section": "CCC.C01",
      "SubSection": "Key Management",
      "SubSectionObjective": "Objective description",
      "Applicability": ["IaaS", "PaaS", "SaaS"],
      "Recommendation": "Recommended action",
      "SectionThreatMappings": [{"threat": "T1190"}],
      "SectionGuidelineMappings": [{"guideline": "NIST"}]
    }
  ]
}

Prowler ThreatScore

Framework ID format: prowler_threatscore_{provider} (e.g., prowler_threatscore_aws)

Prowler ThreatScore is a custom security scoring framework developed by Prowler that evaluates AWS account security based on four main pillars:

Scoring System:

• LevelOfRisk (1-5): Severity of the security issue
  • 5 = Critical (e.g., root MFA, public S3 buckets)
  • 4 = High (e.g., user MFA, public EC2)
  • 3 = Medium (e.g., password policies, encryption)
  • 2 = Low
  • 1 = Informational
• Weight: Impact multiplier for score calculation
  • 1000 = Critical controls (root security, public exposure)
  • 100 = High-impact controls (user authentication, monitoring)
  • 10 = Standard controls (password policies, encryption)
  • 1 = Low-impact controls (best practices)

{
  "Id": "1.1.1",
  "Description": "Ensure MFA is enabled for the 'root' user account",
  "Checks": ["iam_root_mfa_enabled"],
  "Attributes": [
    {
      "Title": "MFA enabled for 'root'",
      "Section": "1. IAM",
      "SubSection": "1.1 Authentication",
      "AttributeDescription": "The root user account holds the highest level of privileges within an AWS account. Enabling MFA enhances security by adding an additional layer of protection.",
      "AdditionalInformation": "Enabling MFA enhances console security by requiring the authenticating user to both possess a time-sensitive key-generating device and have knowledge of their credentials.",
      "LevelOfRisk": 5,
      "Weight": 1000
    }
  ]
}

Available for providers: AWS, Kubernetes, M365

Available Compliance Frameworks

AWS (41 frameworks)

Azure (15+ frameworks)

GCP (15+ frameworks)

Kubernetes (6 frameworks)

Other Providers

• GitHub: cis_1.0_github.json
• M365: cis_4.0_m365.json, iso27001_2022_m365.json
• NHN: iso27001_2022_nhn.json

Best Practices

1. Requirement IDs: Follow the original framework numbering exactly (e.g., "1.1", "A.5.1", "T1190", "ac_2_1")
2. Check Mapping: Map to existing checks when possible. Use Checks: [] for manual-only requirements
3. Completeness: Include all framework requirements, even those without automated checks
4. Version Control: Include framework version in Name and Version fields
5. File Naming: Use format {framework}_{version}_{provider}.json
6. Validation: Prowler validates JSON against Pydantic models at startup - invalid JSON will cause errors

Commands

# List available frameworks for a provider
prowler {provider} --list-compliance

# Run scan with specific compliance framework
prowler aws --compliance cis_5.0_aws

# Run scan with multiple frameworks
prowler aws --compliance cis_5.0_aws pci_4.0_aws

# Output compliance report in multiple formats
prowler aws --compliance cis_5.0_aws -M csv json html

Code References

• Compliance Models: prowler/lib/check/compliance_models.py
• Compliance Processing: prowler/lib/check/compliance.py
• Compliance Output: prowler/lib/outputs/compliance/

Resources

• Templates: See assets/ for framework JSON templates
• Documentation: See references/compliance-docs.md for additional resources