@blamejs/exceptd-skills 0.18.20 → 0.18.21

package/scripts/builders/catalog-summaries.js

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ const path = require("path");
 const CATALOG_PURPOSES = {
   "cve-catalog.json": "Per-CVE record (CVSS, EPSS, CISA KEV, RWEP, AI-discovery, vendor advisories, framework gaps, ATLAS/ATT&CK mappings). Cross-validated against NVD + CISA KEV + FIRST EPSS via validate-cves.",
   "cwe-catalog.json": "MITRE CWE entries used by the project (subset with skill citations), with severity hint and category. Pinned to a CWE catalog version.",
-  "atlas-ttps.json": "MITRE ATLAS TTPs (AML.T0xxx) cited by skills, with tactic, name, description. Pinned to ATLAS v2026.05 (May 2026).",
+  "atlas-ttps.json": "MITRE ATLAS TTPs (AML.T0xxx) cited by skills, with tactic, name, description. Pinned to ATLAS v2026.06 (May 2026).",
   "d3fend-catalog.json": "MITRE D3FEND countermeasures (D3-xxx) keyed by id, with tactic + name. Pinned to D3FEND v1.3.0 release.",
   "framework-control-gaps.json": "Per-control framework gap declarations: SI-2, A.8.8, PCI 6.3.3, etc. Each entry names the control, the lag, the evidence CVE, and remediation guidance.",
   "global-frameworks.json": "Multi-jurisdiction framework registry: per-jurisdiction applicable frameworks × patch_sla / notification_sla / critical_controls / framework_gaps (jurisdiction count is reported by entry_count, not duplicated here). Cross-cutting authority for jurisdiction-clocks index.",

package/scripts/builders/recipes.js

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ const RECIPES = [
     when_to_use: "Before scoping or executing a red-team engagement against a model, agentic system, or AI feature.",
     typical_jurisdictions: ["US", "EU", "UK", "GLOBAL"],
     steps: [
-      { skill: "ai-attack-surface", why: "Comprehensive attack-surface inventory mapped to ATLAS v2026.05 with gap flags." },
+      { skill: "ai-attack-surface", why: "Comprehensive attack-surface inventory mapped to ATLAS v2026.06 with gap flags." },
       { skill: "ai-c2-detection", why: "Detection coverage for AI-as-C2 (PROMPTFLUX / SesameOp / AI-API egress) before testing." },
       { skill: "mcp-agent-trust", why: "MCP server trust boundary for the engineering toolchain side of the surface." },
       { skill: "rag-pipeline-security", why: "RAG ingestion provenance + prompt-injection chain coverage." },

package/skills/age-gates-child-safety/skill.md

@@ -125,13 +125,13 @@ Classical security and privacy frameworks (NIST 800-53 r5, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, S
 
 ## TTP Mapping
 
-This skill is primarily a compliance + privacy-engineering skill rather than a technical-exploit skill. There are no ATLAS-catalogued AI-attack TTPs that are child-specific as of v2026.05, and most relevant attacker activity intersects general ATT&CK techniques rather than child-targeted novel TTPs. The relevant mapping is therefore narrower and explicitly flagged as such — `atlas_refs` is empty by design, not omission.
+This skill is primarily a compliance + privacy-engineering skill rather than a technical-exploit skill. There are no ATLAS-catalogued AI-attack TTPs that are child-specific as of v2026.06, and most relevant attacker activity intersects general ATT&CK techniques rather than child-targeted novel TTPs. The relevant mapping is therefore narrower and explicitly flagged as such — `atlas_refs` is empty by design, not omission.
 
 | ID | Source | Technique | Child-Safeguarding Relevance | Gap Flag |
 |---|---|---|---|---|
 | T1078 | ATT&CK Enterprise | Valid Accounts | Account takeover targeting child accounts (compromised parental controls; sextortion via stolen accounts; grooming via account hijack) — child accounts are under-protected because MFA roll-out lags adult user populations. | NIST 800-53 AC-2 + COPPA / AADC / Children's Code silent on MFA-for-child requirement; the AC-2 gap entry in `data/framework-control-gaps.json` covers AI-service-principals not child identities. Hand off to `identity-assurance` for AAL2+ on child accounts where vendor terms permit. |
 | T1567 | ATT&CK Enterprise | Exfiltration Over Web Service | Child PI exfiltrated via AI-tool / SaaS egress — additional liability under COPPA (no behavioral-ad use of under-13 PI), AADC (DPIA failure), GDPR Art. 8 (no lawful basis), DPDPA (default-VPC bypass), CN PIPL Art. 31 (child PI = sensitive PI requiring separate consent). | Hand off to `dlp-gap-analysis` for child-PI as a protected data class; COPPA / AADC / Children's Code do not name DLP technical controls; the SOC2-CC7 anomaly-detection gap entry applies. |
-| AI-generated CSAM creation / distribution | Not catalogued in ATLAS or ATT&CK as of v2026.05 | Generative-AI image / video synthesis depicting children | Direct criminal exposure under 18 U.S.C. §§2251, 2252, 2252A, 2256 (Protect Act / Mash-Up Act framework); mandatory NCMEC reporting per §2258A. Multiple 2024-2025 prosecutions (US v. Anderegg WD-Wis 2024 — first federal AI-CSAM prosecution; UK National Crime Agency campaign 2024-2025). | No formal TTP class. Evidence stream: NCMEC CyberTipline reports + EU IWF reports. Hand off to `ai-attack-surface` for generative-model content-policy red-team and to `incident-response-playbook` for reporting workflow. |
+| AI-generated CSAM creation / distribution | Not catalogued in ATLAS or ATT&CK as of v2026.06 | Generative-AI image / video synthesis depicting children | Direct criminal exposure under 18 U.S.C. §§2251, 2252, 2252A, 2256 (Protect Act / Mash-Up Act framework); mandatory NCMEC reporting per §2258A. Multiple 2024-2025 prosecutions (US v. Anderegg WD-Wis 2024 — first federal AI-CSAM prosecution; UK National Crime Agency campaign 2024-2025). | No formal TTP class. Evidence stream: NCMEC CyberTipline reports + EU IWF reports. Hand off to `ai-attack-surface` for generative-model content-policy red-team and to `incident-response-playbook` for reporting workflow. |
 | AI chatbot grooming / harmful-content engagement with children | Not catalogued | Long-context AI chatbot interactions with children steering toward harm | Research and litigation evidence: Character.ai litigation 2024 (FL wrongful-death suit alleging companion-chatbot contribution to minor suicide; additional 2024-2025 complaints); UK NCA campaign 2024 documenting grooming attempts via AI chatbots; ESRC / RAND research 2024-2025. | No formal TTP class. EU DSA Art. 28 + UK OSA + AU OSA + KOSA-if-enacted all frame this as a platform duty-of-care obligation. Hand off to `ai-risk-management` for AI-product age policy enforcement. |
 
 **Honest scope statement (no fabricated TTP IDs).** This skill does not invent TTP IDs to fill gaps in the ATLAS or ATT&CK matrices. AI-generated CSAM and AI-chatbot-mediated harm to children are real-world threat classes documented through prosecution records, NCMEC / IWF reporting, and litigation — not novel ATLAS techniques. Citation is to the evidence stream, not to a TTP ID.

package/skills/ai-attack-surface/skill.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: ai-attack-surface
 version: "1.0.0"
-description: Comprehensive AI/ML attack surface assessment mapped to MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 with explicit framework gap flags
+description: Comprehensive AI/ML attack surface assessment mapped to MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 with explicit framework gap flags
 triggers:
   - ai attack surface
   - prompt injection
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ AI-assisted reconnaissance is observed at 36,000 probes per second per campaign.
 | SOC 2 | CC6 (Logical and Physical Access) | Access control via IAM, authentication, authorization. Prompt injection is an access control failure that routes around CC6 entirely — the authorized model account takes the action, not the attacker. Audit trails show the model's service account performed the action. |
 | SOC 2 | CC7 (System Operations) | Anomaly detection for system operations. No guidance for AI API baseline, AI C2 detection, or PROMPTFLUX behavioral patterns. |
 | PCI DSS 4.0 | 6.4.1 | Web application protection (WAF). WAFs operate on HTTP request/response patterns. They have no semantic understanding of prompt injection embedded in JSON `message` fields. |
-| MITRE ATT&CK | Enterprise | Does not include prompt injection as a technique. AI-as-C2 (SesameOp) is not in ATT&CK as of mid-2026. ATLAS v2026.05 covers these but is not part of SOC detection engineering programs that are ATT&CK-mapped. |
+| MITRE ATT&CK | Enterprise | Does not include prompt injection as a technique. AI-as-C2 (SesameOp) is not in ATT&CK as of mid-2026. ATLAS v2026.06 covers these but is not part of SOC detection engineering programs that are ATT&CK-mapped. |
 | NIST AI RMF | MEASURE 2.5 | Measure AI risks during operation. Provides a framework for thinking about AI risk but no specific controls for prompt injection, MCP supply chain, or AI-as-C2. |
 | EU NIS2 | Art. 21(2)(d) (supply-chain security) + Art. 21(2)(e) (security in acquisition, development and maintenance) | "Appropriate and proportionate" supply-chain language. Member-state transpositions (BSI IT-SiG 2.0, ANSSI) do not enumerate MCP servers or LLM API providers as in-scope supply-chain components. An essential entity can meet NIS2 supplier-management obligations with traditional SaaS vendor reviews while having zero coverage of AI-assistant tool ecosystems. |
 | EU DORA | Art. 8 (ICT asset management) + Art. 28 (ICT third-party register) + Art. 30 (key contractual provisions) | Financial-entity ICT third-party language scoped to traditional ICT providers. LLM API providers acting as data processors for prompt content and developer-environment MCP servers are not enumerated as ICT third-party service providers. ESAs RTS on subcontracting (JC 2024/53) is silent on AI/ML SaaS dependency classes. |
@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ AI-assisted reconnaissance is observed at 36,000 probes per second per campaign.
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06)
 
 | ATLAS ID | Technique | Framework Coverage | Gap Description | Exploitation Example |
 |---|---|---|---|---|

package/skills/ai-c2-detection/skill.md

@@ -330,13 +330,13 @@ level: medium
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 + MITRE ATT&CK)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 + MITRE ATT&CK)
 
 | ID | Source | Technique | C2 Relevance | Gap Flag — Which Detection Control Fails |
 |---|---|---|---|---|
-| AML.T0096 | ATLAS v2026.05 | LLM API as covert C2 / LLM Integration Abuse | Direct: SesameOp encodes commands and exfiltrated data in prompt and completion fields against api.openai.com, api.anthropic.com, generativelanguage.googleapis.com. AI provider domain is the relay, not the attacker C2 endpoint. | NIST-800-53-SC-7 (Boundary Protection) — AI provider domains are allowlisted in most enterprise egress for legitimate developer and product use, so boundary inspection cannot distinguish benign developer prompts from C2-encoded prompts. See SC-7 entry in `data/framework-control-gaps.json` — real requirement is SDK-level prompt logging with identity binding, anomaly detection on prompt-shape and token-volume, and an allowlist that enumerates the sanctioned business reason per identity. Boundary-only SC-7 evidence is incomplete for any org with AI API access in production. |
-| AML.T0017 | ATLAS v2026.05 | Discover ML Model Ontology — adversary maps the deployed LLM's family, system-prompt structure, guardrail surface via inference-API probing | PROMPTFLUX queries public LLMs to generate per-execution evasion code; PROMPTSTEAL uses LLMs to prioritise exfiltration targets — both depend on first discovering what the target model will answer. The inference API is the discovery surface. | NIST-800-53-SI-3 fails — there is no static signature for code generated per-event by a public LLM. NIST-800-53-SI-4 fails as commonly deployed — no AI-API behavioural baseline per process/identity. |
-| AML.T0016 | ATLAS v2026.05 | Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities — adversary use of inference APIs to generate / refine malware, evasion, phishing payloads | PROMPTFLUX and PROMPTSTEAL both consume public LLMs as a real-time capability-development service. The inference API is doing weaponization work for the adversary. | NIST-800-53-SI-3 fails for the same reason. SC-7 boundary control treats the AI provider as allowlisted SaaS. |
+| AML.T0096 | ATLAS v2026.06 | LLM API as covert C2 / LLM Integration Abuse | Direct: SesameOp encodes commands and exfiltrated data in prompt and completion fields against api.openai.com, api.anthropic.com, generativelanguage.googleapis.com. AI provider domain is the relay, not the attacker C2 endpoint. | NIST-800-53-SC-7 (Boundary Protection) — AI provider domains are allowlisted in most enterprise egress for legitimate developer and product use, so boundary inspection cannot distinguish benign developer prompts from C2-encoded prompts. See SC-7 entry in `data/framework-control-gaps.json` — real requirement is SDK-level prompt logging with identity binding, anomaly detection on prompt-shape and token-volume, and an allowlist that enumerates the sanctioned business reason per identity. Boundary-only SC-7 evidence is incomplete for any org with AI API access in production. |
+| AML.T0017 | ATLAS v2026.06 | Discover ML Model Ontology — adversary maps the deployed LLM's family, system-prompt structure, guardrail surface via inference-API probing | PROMPTFLUX queries public LLMs to generate per-execution evasion code; PROMPTSTEAL uses LLMs to prioritise exfiltration targets — both depend on first discovering what the target model will answer. The inference API is the discovery surface. | NIST-800-53-SI-3 fails — there is no static signature for code generated per-event by a public LLM. NIST-800-53-SI-4 fails as commonly deployed — no AI-API behavioural baseline per process/identity. |
+| AML.T0016 | ATLAS v2026.06 | Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities — adversary use of inference APIs to generate / refine malware, evasion, phishing payloads | PROMPTFLUX and PROMPTSTEAL both consume public LLMs as a real-time capability-development service. The inference API is doing weaponization work for the adversary. | NIST-800-53-SI-3 fails for the same reason. SC-7 boundary control treats the AI provider as allowlisted SaaS. |
 | T1071 | ATT&CK | Application Layer Protocol (C2) | AI C2 traffic is standard HTTPS REST to api.openai.com or equivalent. Application-protocol C2 detection that looks for DGA, unusual TLS, or beaconing does not fire. | SC-7 boundary control sees only the destination domain (allowlisted) — no protocol anomaly to alert on. Detection requires identity-bound prompt content inspection, which SC-7 as written does not require. |
 | T1102 | ATT&CK | Web Service (C2 via legitimate web service) | AI API endpoints are exactly the "legitimate web service used as C2" pattern that T1102 describes — but at scale and pre-allowlisted in nearly every enterprise. | SOC 2 CC7 anomaly-detection control: AI API traffic shares the SaaS blind spot — typically not baselined per process or identity. ISO 27001 A.8.16 monitoring activities: no guidance for AI-API-shaped traffic. |
 | T1568 | ATT&CK | Dynamic Resolution | AI provider responses can carry encoded instructions that dynamically determine the next-hop behaviour for the malware (effectively model-mediated dynamic resolution of the next attacker instruction). | No standard DNS-tunnelling or DGA detection applies — the "resolution" happens inside an HTTPS payload to a trusted endpoint. SC-7 cannot see it without SDK-level prompt + response logging. |

package/skills/api-security/skill.md

@@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ APIs are now the integration substrate of every non-trivial system. The mid-2026
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise + ATLAS v2026.05)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise + ATLAS v2026.06)
 
 | TTP ID | Technique | API Manifestation | CWE Root-Causes | Framework Coverage |
 |---|---|---|---|---|

package/skills/attack-surface-pentest/skill.md

@@ -115,17 +115,17 @@ A pen test scoped to layers 1 and (partly) 7 — i.e. "web app + network + nomin
 | CBEST (Bank of England / PRA / FCA) | Whole framework | UK equivalent to TIBER-EU for systemically important financial firms. Same lag pattern as TIBER-EU. CBEST-certified providers are not required to demonstrate competence in AI-surface attack emulation as of mid-2026. |
 | Australian ISM (Information Security Manual) + ACSC Essential 8 | ISM controls on penetration testing; Essential 8 Maturity Level 3 testing requirements | Essential 8 mandates regular testing of mitigation strategies (patching, app control, MFA, etc.). The testing requirements do not extend to AI-API egress as C2, MCP trust, or RAG poisoning. ISM control set is network/endpoint centric. |
 | ISO/IEC 27001:2022 | A.5.34 (Privacy and protection of PII) — note: the actually relevant clause for independent review is **A.5.35 (Independent review of information security)** and **A.8.29 (Security testing in development and acceptance)** | A.5.35 requires independent review of the information security approach at planned intervals or when significant changes occur. The clause is methodology-agnostic — auditors accept a network/web pen test as evidence even when AI surfaces are in production. A.8.29 mandates security testing of new and changed information systems, but does not define what an adequate test of an AI system looks like. |
-| MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise (v19.1) | Whole matrix | The enterprise matrix does not contain prompt-injection as a technique. AI-as-C2 (SesameOp pattern) is absent from ATT&CK as of mid-2026. Adversary emulation programs that are ATT&CK-only and not ATLAS-extended will not include the mid-2026 dominant new tradecraft in their playbooks. ATLAS v2026.05 covers it — but ATLAS is not yet a standard requirement for pen testing certification or scoping. |
+| MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise (v19.1) | Whole matrix | The enterprise matrix does not contain prompt-injection as a technique. AI-as-C2 (SesameOp pattern) is absent from ATT&CK as of mid-2026. Adversary emulation programs that are ATT&CK-only and not ATLAS-extended will not include the mid-2026 dominant new tradecraft in their playbooks. ATLAS v2026.06 covers it — but ATLAS is not yet a standard requirement for pen testing certification or scoping. |
 
 > Global coverage note: the above table spans US (NIST 800-115, ATT&CK), EU (NIS2, TIBER-EU under DORA), UK (CBEST), AU (ISM/Essential 8), and ISO 27001:2022. US-only pen test scoping is incomplete.
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 + MITRE ATT&CK v19.1)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 + MITRE ATT&CK v19.1)
 
 Pen testers must emulate both classical and AI-class chains. The table below maps the kill-chain phases a mid-2026 adversary emulation engagement must cover.
 
-| Phase | Classical TTP (ATT&CK v19.1) | AI-Class TTP (ATLAS v2026.05) | Framework Gap Flag |
+| Phase | Classical TTP (ATT&CK v19.1) | AI-Class TTP (ATLAS v2026.06) | Framework Gap Flag |
 |---|---|---|---|
 | Reconnaissance | T1595 (Active Scanning) — implied by T1190 setup | AML.TA0002 (Reconnaissance tactic) — model card / dataset / API endpoint discovery, system-prompt probing | NIST 800-115 §3.x recon guidance is network-only |
 | Initial Access | T1190 (Exploit Public-Facing Application) | AML.T0051 (LLM Prompt Injection) — entered via PR description, support ticket, retrieved doc | OWASP WSTG covers webapp; not prompt-injection as entry vector |

package/skills/cloud-security/skill.md

@@ -131,8 +131,8 @@ Cloud is where AI runs. Every consequential AI service — OpenAI, Anthropic, Go
 | Cloud data exfiltration | T1530 — Data from Cloud Storage Object | ATT&CK Enterprise | Public S3 / GCS / Blob storage discovery via Wiz-style external attack-surface scan; legitimate IAM principal exfil via federated workload; cross-tenant boundary failure on SaaS | NIST 800-53 SC-28 (encryption at rest) does not address access-policy errors; CWE-200, CWE-732, CWE-862 |
 | Cloud-facing application | T1190 — Exploit Public-Facing Application | ATT&CK Enterprise | API Gateway / Load Balancer / managed-WAF-bypass; managed-database exposure (RDS / SQL DB / Cloud SQL public IP); container-registry public image abuse; Lambda / Cloud Functions / Azure Functions endpoint exploit | NIST 800-53 SC-7 perimeter assumption inadequate; CSA CCM AIS-04 and IVS-08 partial; CWE-1188 (Insecure Default Initialization) |
 | Cloud-credential exposure | T1552 — Unsecured Credentials (incl. T1552.001 Files, T1552.005 Cloud Instance Metadata API, T1552.007 Container API) | ATT&CK Enterprise | IMDSv1 SSRF on EC2 / GCE; static cloud credentials in git / images / env vars; container API and kubeconfig theft; workload-identity-federation trust-policy abuse | CWE-798 (hardcoded credentials), CWE-200; NIST 800-53 IA-5 method-neutral |
-| AI model registry / cloud-hosted model | AML.T0010 — ML Supply Chain Compromise | ATLAS v2026.05 | Bedrock / SageMaker custom model from poisoned upstream; Azure ML model registry tampering; Vertex Model Garden mirror tampering; HF model pulled into Bedrock / SageMaker / Vertex with weights backdoor | CSA CCM CCC-09 (vendor / supply chain) silent on model-supply-chain specifics; SLSA / in-toto / Sigstore for models still maturing |
-| Cloud inference API abuse / model extraction | AML.T0017 — Discover ML Model Ontology (inference-API probing for system-prompt, guardrail, model-family signal against cloud-hosted endpoints); AML.T0016 — Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities (downstream weaponization) | ATLAS v2026.05 | Programmatic query of Bedrock / Azure OpenAI / Vertex endpoint to extract model behaviour, training-data inference, system-prompt leakage | No cloud-specific ATLAS control mapping for inference-API rate-limit / anomaly detection; chain to `ai-attack-surface` |
+| AI model registry / cloud-hosted model | AML.T0010 — ML Supply Chain Compromise | ATLAS v2026.06 | Bedrock / SageMaker custom model from poisoned upstream; Azure ML model registry tampering; Vertex Model Garden mirror tampering; HF model pulled into Bedrock / SageMaker / Vertex with weights backdoor | CSA CCM CCC-09 (vendor / supply chain) silent on model-supply-chain specifics; SLSA / in-toto / Sigstore for models still maturing |
+| Cloud inference API abuse / model extraction | AML.T0017 — Discover ML Model Ontology (inference-API probing for system-prompt, guardrail, model-family signal against cloud-hosted endpoints); AML.T0016 — Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities (downstream weaponization) | ATLAS v2026.06 | Programmatic query of Bedrock / Azure OpenAI / Vertex endpoint to extract model behaviour, training-data inference, system-prompt leakage | No cloud-specific ATLAS control mapping for inference-API rate-limit / anomaly detection; chain to `ai-attack-surface` |
 
 **Note on ATT&CK Enterprise cloud-platform sub-techniques.** ATT&CK Enterprise has cloud-platform-specific matrices (IaaS, SaaS, Office 365, Azure AD / Entra ID, Google Workspace). T1078.004 (Cloud Accounts), T1552.005 (Cloud Instance Metadata API), T1552.007 (Container API), T1190 with cloud-service variants, T1530 with managed-storage variants are the most operationally relevant. The frontmatter pins the parent IDs; analysis should descend to the sub-technique appropriate to the cloud(s) in scope.
 

package/skills/compliance-theater/skill.md

@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ The pre-analyzed gaps for these controls live in the framework-gap-analysis skil
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 and ATT&CK)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 and ATT&CK)
 
 Each theater pattern below maps to one or more attacker TTPs in `data/atlas-ttps.json` and MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise. The mapping is what distinguishes theater from genuine compliance: a control claimed as compensating must map to a TTP it actually disrupts.
 
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ Each theater pattern below maps to one or more attacker TTPs in `data/atlas-ttps
 | Vendor/Third-Party Risk Theater — AI APIs (Pattern 6) | AML.T0010 (ML Supply Chain Compromise) | MCP servers and LLM APIs sit outside the vendor-management scope |
 | Security Awareness Theater — AI Phishing (Pattern 7) | T1566 (Phishing), AML.T0016 (Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities — misuse of public AI APIs for payload crafting) | AI-generated content evades grammar/style heuristics and template-matching detectors |
 
-Source-of-truth TTP catalog: `data/atlas-ttps.json` (pinned to MITRE ATLAS v2026.05, May 2026). Any theater claim in an assessment must cite at least one TTP ID from that catalog or an ATT&CK Enterprise ID — claims without a mapped TTP are orphaned controls and are rejected.
+Source-of-truth TTP catalog: `data/atlas-ttps.json` (pinned to MITRE ATLAS v2026.06, May 2026). Any theater claim in an assessment must cite at least one TTP ID from that catalog or an ATT&CK Enterprise ID — claims without a mapped TTP are orphaned controls and are rejected.
 
 ---
 

package/skills/container-runtime-security/skill.md

@@ -124,9 +124,9 @@ State of standards baselines:
 | Container escape to host | T1611 — Escape to Host | ATT&CK Enterprise | Kernel LPE (Copy Fail CVE-2026-31431, Dirty Frag CVE-2026-43284 family); historical runc CVE-2024-21626 LeakyVessels family; cgroup v1 release_agent legacy abuses; abuse of overly permissive capabilities (`CAP_SYS_ADMIN`, `CAP_SYS_MODULE`) | NIST 800-190 predates kernel-LPE-as-container-escape as the dominant vector. Defense requires kernel patching cadence (hand off to `kernel-lpe-triage`) plus seccomp default profile, capability drops, read-only rootfs, and runtime detection. None of these are framework-mandated. |
 | Privilege escalation within the container | T1068 — Exploitation for Privilege Escalation | ATT&CK Enterprise | In-container kernel LPE (yields host root via T1611 chain); abuse of writable hostPath; abuse of mounted Docker socket | Method-neutral framework controls; the actual control is seccomp + dropped capabilities + read-only rootfs + non-root runAsUser, all enforced by PSS-Restricted profile |
 | Exploit public-facing K8s component | T1190 — Exploit Public-Facing Application | ATT&CK Enterprise | Exposed kube-apiserver (rare but seen on self-managed clusters); exposed kubelet read-only port (10255) or read/write port (10250) without authentication; exposed Kubernetes Dashboard with no auth; exposed Argo CD or Jenkins on the cluster; ingress controller CVEs (ingress-nginx CVE-2025 family) | NSA/CISA Hardening Guide v1.2 addresses control-plane exposure; managed services close this by default; self-managed clusters in CI/government still expose these |
-| Compromised container image at a public/private registry | AML.T0010 — ML Supply Chain Compromise (umbrella) | ATLAS v2026.05 | Poisoned base image; backdoored model-serving image; typosquatted MCP server in a sidecar; AI-pipeline-specific (KServe / vLLM / Triton image with embedded malicious payload) | ATLAS classifies; no framework mandates signature verification at admission. Hand off the build-side provenance to `supply-chain-integrity`; the container-runtime control is `ClusterImagePolicy` enforcement |
+| Compromised container image at a public/private registry | AML.T0010 — ML Supply Chain Compromise (umbrella) | ATLAS v2026.06 | Poisoned base image; backdoored model-serving image; typosquatted MCP server in a sidecar; AI-pipeline-specific (KServe / vLLM / Triton image with embedded malicious payload) | ATLAS classifies; no framework mandates signature verification at admission. Hand off the build-side provenance to `supply-chain-integrity`; the container-runtime control is `ClusterImagePolicy` enforcement |
 
-ATT&CK Containers matrix (sub-matrix, since 2021) and ATT&CK for Kubernetes (Microsoft's threat matrix, 2020, since absorbed conceptually into ATT&CK Containers) are both relevant prior art. The Enterprise IDs above are canonical in ATLAS v2026.05 alignment and pass the linter regex `^T\d{4}(\.\d{3})?$`.
+ATT&CK Containers matrix (sub-matrix, since 2021) and ATT&CK for Kubernetes (Microsoft's threat matrix, 2020, since absorbed conceptually into ATT&CK Containers) are both relevant prior art. The Enterprise IDs above are canonical in ATLAS v2026.06 alignment and pass the linter regex `^T\d{4}(\.\d{3})?$`.
 
 CWE cross-walk (see `data/cwe-catalog.json`):
 

package/skills/coordinated-vuln-disclosure/skill.md

@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ This skill is meta — it is the upstream input pipeline that feeds the downstre
 |---|---|
 | `data/cve-catalog.json` | **Downstream product.** Every CVE in this catalog is the output of a CVD process (someone's, somewhere). When this org receives a report covering one of its own products, the resulting CVE enters this catalog via the same schema. |
 | `data/zeroday-lessons.json` | **Downstream consumer.** Every disclosed CVE feeds the zero-day learning loop run by `zeroday-gap-learn`. A CVD program with no entries here is not learning from its own disclosures. |
-| `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05) | **Lookup for AI-class disclosures.** When a report covers an AI vulnerability, map the attack mechanism to an ATLAS TTP (e.g., AML.T0051 LLM Prompt Injection, AML.T0096 LLM Plugin Compromise) for advisory tagging. |
+| `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06) | **Lookup for AI-class disclosures.** When a report covers an AI vulnerability, map the attack mechanism to an ATLAS TTP (e.g., AML.T0051 LLM Prompt Injection, AML.T0096 LLM Plugin Compromise) for advisory tagging. |
 | `data/framework-control-gaps.json` | **Lookup for regulator-notification routing.** Each disclosure intersects one or more framework controls; this skill writes new gaps when a disclosure exposes one. |
 | `data/cwe-catalog.json` | **Required taxonomy for advisories.** Per CVE-Numbering-Authority practice, every CVE advisory cites a CWE. `CWE-1357 Reliance on Insufficiently Trustworthy Component` is invoked for supply-chain disclosures (MCP servers, AI dependencies); other CWEs per the specific class. |
 | `data/d3fend-catalog.json` | **Defensive mapping for advisory recommendations.** Advisories that recommend mitigations should cite D3FEND IDs so blue teams can map the recommendation to existing control surfaces. See Defensive Countermeasure Mapping section. |

package/skills/dlp-gap-analysis/skill.md

@@ -124,13 +124,13 @@ A DLP gap analysis that maps only to NIST 800-53 SC-7, ISO 27001:2022 A.8.16, HI
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 + MITRE ATT&CK)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 + MITRE ATT&CK)
 
 | ID | Source | Technique | DLP Relevance | Gap Flag — Which DLP Control Fails |
 |---|---|---|---|---|
-| AML.T0096 | ATLAS v2026.05 | AI API as Covert C2 Channel | Direct: prompt and completion bodies as covert exfil. The same SesameOp pattern that is a C2 channel is also a DLP exfil channel — prompts encode payloads against allowlisted AI provider domains. Cross-references `DLP-CHAN-LLM-PROMPT` and `DLP-CHAN-LLM-CONTEXT` in `data/dlp-controls.json`. | Legacy email/web/USB DLP (`DLP-CHAN-EMAIL-OUT`, `DLP-CHAN-WEB-UPLOAD`, `DLP-CHAN-USB-REMOVABLE`) sees nothing. AI-aware DLP (`DLP-CHAN-LLM-PROMPT`) is the only effective control category. SC-7 boundary controls allowlist the AI provider domain — no protocol or destination anomaly fires. |
-| AML.T0017 | ATLAS v2026.05 | Discover ML Model Ontology | Indirect but DLP-relevant: model inversion and membership-inference attacks against embedding stores and fine-tuned models extract training-corpus content (which is itself a protected surface — see `DLP-SURFACE-TRAINING-DATA`, `DLP-SURFACE-EMBEDDING-STORE`). | No legacy DLP control category exists. Modern controls: embedding-similarity classification at retrieval boundary (`DLP-CLASS-EMBEDDING-MATCH`), differential-privacy fine-tuning, query-rate limits on inference APIs. None of these are named in any compliance framework. |
-| AML.T0051 | ATLAS v2026.05 | LLM Prompt Injection | Direct: prompt-injection-induced data extraction. A malicious document in a RAG corpus or a poisoned tool output (MCP) coerces the model into emitting protected content in a subsequent response. Cross-references `DLP-CHAN-LLM-CONTEXT` and `DLP-CHAN-MCP-TOOL-ARG`. | Egress-side classification on model output catches some cases but is fundamentally retroactive. Retrieval-time classification (`DLP-SURFACE-RAG-CORPUS`) and MCP tool-call argument inspection (`DLP-CHAN-MCP-TOOL-ARG`) are the primary controls. No compliance framework names either. |
+| AML.T0096 | ATLAS v2026.06 | AI API as Covert C2 Channel | Direct: prompt and completion bodies as covert exfil. The same SesameOp pattern that is a C2 channel is also a DLP exfil channel — prompts encode payloads against allowlisted AI provider domains. Cross-references `DLP-CHAN-LLM-PROMPT` and `DLP-CHAN-LLM-CONTEXT` in `data/dlp-controls.json`. | Legacy email/web/USB DLP (`DLP-CHAN-EMAIL-OUT`, `DLP-CHAN-WEB-UPLOAD`, `DLP-CHAN-USB-REMOVABLE`) sees nothing. AI-aware DLP (`DLP-CHAN-LLM-PROMPT`) is the only effective control category. SC-7 boundary controls allowlist the AI provider domain — no protocol or destination anomaly fires. |
+| AML.T0017 | ATLAS v2026.06 | Discover ML Model Ontology | Indirect but DLP-relevant: model inversion and membership-inference attacks against embedding stores and fine-tuned models extract training-corpus content (which is itself a protected surface — see `DLP-SURFACE-TRAINING-DATA`, `DLP-SURFACE-EMBEDDING-STORE`). | No legacy DLP control category exists. Modern controls: embedding-similarity classification at retrieval boundary (`DLP-CLASS-EMBEDDING-MATCH`), differential-privacy fine-tuning, query-rate limits on inference APIs. None of these are named in any compliance framework. |
+| AML.T0051 | ATLAS v2026.06 | LLM Prompt Injection | Direct: prompt-injection-induced data extraction. A malicious document in a RAG corpus or a poisoned tool output (MCP) coerces the model into emitting protected content in a subsequent response. Cross-references `DLP-CHAN-LLM-CONTEXT` and `DLP-CHAN-MCP-TOOL-ARG`. | Egress-side classification on model output catches some cases but is fundamentally retroactive. Retrieval-time classification (`DLP-SURFACE-RAG-CORPUS`) and MCP tool-call argument inspection (`DLP-CHAN-MCP-TOOL-ARG`) are the primary controls. No compliance framework names either. |
 | T1567 | ATT&CK | Exfiltration Over Web Service | LLM and AI API endpoints are exactly the "legitimate web service used for exfil" pattern, pre-allowlisted in nearly every enterprise. | SC-7 sees only the destination domain (allowlisted). SDK-level prompt logging with identity binding is the only practical control. |
 | T1530 | ATT&CK | Data from Cloud Storage Object | Includes vector stores and model registries — embedding stores (Pinecone, Weaviate, Qdrant, pgvector, Vertex AI Matching Engine) and model artifacts in cloud object stores are 2026's high-value crown-jewel surface. See `DLP-SURFACE-EMBEDDING-STORE` and `DLP-SURFACE-TRAINING-DATA`. | Cloud DLP scanning of object stores is mature for files but not for vector indexes — index payloads are not classifiable as files. Vector-store-native ACL audit is the practical control. |
 | T1213 | ATT&CK | Data from Information Repositories | RAG corpora are exactly information repositories (SharePoint, Confluence, GitHub, Drive) ingested into vector indexes. Cross-cleared retrieval is a confused-deputy exfil channel. See `DLP-SURFACE-RAG-CORPUS`. | Repository-side ACL enforcement does not propagate to RAG context. Retrieval-time classification with user-clearance check is required (`DLP-CHAN-LLM-CONTEXT`). |

package/skills/exploit-scoring/skill.md

@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ This skill is meta — it does not pin to a single TTP class. RWEP is the cross-
 | Catalog | Role for RWEP |
 |---|---|
 | `data/cve-catalog.json` | Source of factor values: CISA KEV flag, PoC availability, AI-discovery flag, active-exploitation status, patch and live-patch availability per CVE |
-| `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05) | Provides the AI/ML TTP context where AI-discovery and AI-acceleration factors apply (e.g., AML.T0016 Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities, AML.T0017 Discover ML Model Ontology) |
+| `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06) | Provides the AI/ML TTP context where AI-discovery and AI-acceleration factors apply (e.g., AML.T0016 Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities, AML.T0017 Discover ML Model Ontology) |
 | `data/exploit-availability.json` | Authoritative PoC + KEV + last-verified date snapshot — drives factor freshness |
 | `data/zeroday-lessons.json` | Closes the loop: zero-day's lesson entry feeds back the framework gap that RWEP's score implied |
 

package/skills/framework-gap-analysis/skill.md

@@ -66,14 +66,14 @@ The global-first requirement binds against the full expanded catalog, not the EU
 - **China (CN):** PIPL, DSL, CSL, Cybersecurity Review Measures (2022).
 - **Brazil (BR):** LGPD + ANPD guidance.
 - **Saudi Arabia (KSA):** PDPL + SDAIA Implementing Regulation 2023.
-- **Global standards:** ISO 27001:2022 / 27002:2022, ISO/IEC 42001:2023, CSA CCM v4, CIS Controls v8, MITRE ATLAS v2026.05.
+- **Global standards:** ISO 27001:2022 / 27002:2022, ISO/IEC 42001:2023, CSA CCM v4, CIS Controls v8, MITRE ATLAS v2026.06.
 - **US sub-national:** NYDFS 23 NYCRR 500 (amended Nov 2023, phased through Nov 2025); state privacy laws (CA CCPA/CPRA, CO CPA, CT CTDPA, IL BIPA, NY SHIELD, TX DPSA, VA CDPA).
 
 A gap declaration that closes section 6 (Global coverage check) without referencing at least the EU, UK, AU, ISO, and a representative selection from {IL, CH, HK, TW, ID, VN, JP-expanded, KR, CN, BR, NYDFS} for any org operating in those jurisdictions is incomplete: a global-first analysis must cover every applicable jurisdiction, not a US-centric subset. The exact set required depends on the org's footprint — but the analyst must consult `data/global-frameworks.json` to enumerate it rather than defaulting to the legacy four-jurisdiction shorthand.
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 and ATT&CK)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 and ATT&CK)
 
-This skill maps framework controls to attacker TTPs on demand rather than statically. The authoritative TTP catalog is `data/atlas-ttps.json` (pinned to MITRE ATLAS v2026.05, May 2026) supplemented by MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise IDs for non-AI threats. The mapping convention used in every gap declaration this skill produces:
+This skill maps framework controls to attacker TTPs on demand rather than statically. The authoritative TTP catalog is `data/atlas-ttps.json` (pinned to MITRE ATLAS v2026.06, May 2026) supplemented by MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise IDs for non-AI threats. The mapping convention used in every gap declaration this skill produces:
 
 | Built-in gap | Primary TTP(s) | Gap flag |
 |---|---|---|

package/skills/fuzz-testing-strategy/skill.md

@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ By mid-2026 the asymmetry between offensive and defensive fuzzing has flipped. T
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 + MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 + MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise)
 
 Fuzz is a pre-exploit control: it surfaces weaknesses before they leave the build pipeline. Mapping is via the weakness root cause (CWE) rather than the post-exploit technique.
 

package/skills/incident-response-playbook/skill.md

@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ This skill is response-shaped — the TTPs below name the incident classes the p
 | **AML.T0017** | Discover ML Model Ontology | Adversary mapping of deployed model family, system-prompt structure, guardrails, and training-data signal — precursor to extraction and adversarial-input crafting | Identification: anomalous inference-API usage patterns (high-volume queries, structured probing, membership-inference signatures, repeated training-data extraction prompts). Containment: rate-limit + API-key revocation + IP block. Eradication: identify attacker access surface; assess what model-ontology data was exposed. Recovery: re-key, consider model-rotation if proprietary weights are at risk; for training-data exfiltration consider differential-privacy retraining. | No standardized detection signatures; org must build custom telemetry over AI inference APIs. |
 | **AML.T0051** | LLM Prompt Injection | Prompt-injection breach as incident trigger | Identification: AI-assistant or agentic-system anomalous action (unauthorized data access, anomalous tool invocation, identity-context confusion). Containment: revoke AI-system tool scopes, disable agent autonomy, isolate affected RAG corpus. Eradication: identify injection vector (web content, email signature, document metadata, RAG corpus poisoning) and remove. Recovery: re-deploy with hardened system prompt + tool-scoping per `mcp-agent-trust`. | Detection lags; most orgs discover the incident from downstream effect (unauthorized action) rather than detection at the prompt boundary. |
 
-ATLAS pinned to v2026.05 (May 2026). ATT&CK pinned to v19.1 (May 2026); the Defense Evasion (TA0005) split into Stealth (TA0005) and Defense Impairment (TA0112) is traced via `tactic_moved_from` on affected `data/attack-techniques.json` entries and does not introduce breaking changes for the T-IDs cited above.
+ATLAS pinned to v2026.06 (June 2026). ATT&CK pinned to v19.1 (May 2026); the Defense Evasion (TA0005) split into Stealth (TA0005) and Defense Impairment (TA0112) is traced via `tactic_moved_from` on affected `data/attack-techniques.json` entries and does not introduce breaking changes for the T-IDs cited above.
 
 ---
 

package/skills/mcp-agent-trust/skill.md

@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ Every MCP server listed in popular registries (MCP Hub, npm `@modelcontextprotoc
 |---|---|---|---|
 | AML.T0010 | ML Supply Chain Compromise | Direct: malicious MCP server in public registry compromises AI assistant's tool execution | ATLAS covers this conceptually; no framework has a technical control |
 | AML.T0054 | LLM Jailbreak | Indirect: adversarial prompt in tool response bypasses guardrails and triggers AI to call next malicious action | No framework control |
-| AML.T0096 | LLM Integration Abuse | AI assistant is the integration point being abused — MCP tool calls are the mechanism | Not in ATT&CK; only in ATLAS v2026.05 |
+| AML.T0096 | LLM Integration Abuse | AI assistant is the integration point being abused — MCP tool calls are the mechanism | Not in ATT&CK; only in ATLAS v2026.06 |
 | T1195.001 | Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Dependencies | MCP server package as supply chain attack target | ATT&CK covers but enterprise controls don't reach developer MCP configs |
 | T1059 | Command and Script Interpreter | MCP server causes shell command execution via model-mediated tool call | Standard SI-3/EDR doesn't attribute this to the MCP server as origin |
 | T1190 | Exploit Public-Facing Application | CVE-2026-30615: MCP client vulnerability driven by a locally-installed malicious server (AV:L) | Standard vuln management covers client; MCP server trust is unaddressed |

package/skills/mlops-security/skill.md

@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ forward_watch:
   - OpenSSF model-signing emergence to v1.0 — Sigstore-based model-weight signing; track for production adoption and admission-control integration
   - SLSA v1.1 ML profile (draft) — model-provenance extension for training-run attestation chains; track ID and section changes
   - EU AI Act high-risk technical-file implementing acts (2026-2027) — operational requirements for Article 10 / 13 / 15 documentation may pin ML-BOM or model-signing
-  - MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 (released May 2026) shipped the AML.T0010 sub-technique expansion this forecast tracked plus new techniques ("Publish Poisoned AI Agent Tool", "Escape to Host"); inventory now 16 tactics, 84 techniques, 56 sub-techniques. Forward watch: subsequent ATLAS minor and major releases — track next-cadence updates to agentic-AI TTPs and MLOps-pipeline-specific techniques
+  - MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 (released June 2026) is additive over v2026.05 — it adds AML.T0113 (Steal Web Session Cookie), AML.T0091.001 (Use Alternate Authentication Material: Web Session Cookie), and AML.T0114 (AI Service Web Interface) and refreshes AML.T0054 (LLM Jailbreak), with no technique-ID removals. Earlier releases shipped the AML.T0010 sub-technique expansion and agentic-AI techniques ("Publish Poisoned AI Agent Tool", "Escape to Host") this forecast tracked. Forward watch: subsequent monthly ATLAS releases — track next-cadence updates to agentic-AI TTPs and MLOps-pipeline-specific techniques
 last_threat_review: "2026-06-10"
 discovery_mode: "standalone"  # operator-reached via `exceptd brief mlops-security` or `exceptd ask`; not chained into any playbook's direct.skill_chain by design
 ---
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ This skill is distinct from `rag-pipeline-security` (which is retrieval-side of
 
 ## TTP Mapping
 
-Descriptions sourced from `data/atlas-ttps.json` (ATLAS v2026.05, released 2026-05-27).
+Descriptions sourced from `data/atlas-ttps.json` (ATLAS v2026.06, released 2026-06-30).
 
 | ATLAS / ATT&CK ID | Technique | MLOps Lifecycle Stage | Gap |
 |---|---|---|---|

package/skills/ot-ics-security/skill.md

@@ -100,11 +100,11 @@ ATT&CK for ICS is a separate matrix from Enterprise. Many IT-rooted SOCs do not
 | HMI host LPE | T1068 — Exploitation for Privilege Escalation | ATT&CK Enterprise | Windows 7/10 HMI host; un-rebootable; Copy Fail (CVE-2026-31431) on any Linux HMI; Print Spooler / win32k LPE family on Windows HMIs | IT patch SLAs (30 day) inapplicable to HMI hosts; no compensating-control baseline in NIST 800-82r3 |
 | Hard-coded / shared credentials | CWE-798 | CWE | Vendor default creds on PLC web UI; shared "operator" account across HMI fleet | IEC 62443-3-3 SR 1.5 (authenticator management) cannot land on devices that lack per-user accounts; NERC CIP-007-6 R5 password-management partially addresses but exempts cyber-asset classes lacking user-account features |
 | Firmware-image integrity | CWE-1037 (Processor Optimization Removal or Modification of Security-Critical Code) and CWE-345 family (insufficient verification of data authenticity, captured via cve-catalog supply-chain entries) | CWE | Unsigned firmware accepted by L1 device; vendor-side build pipeline compromise | NERC CIP-010 baseline-change management does not require firmware-image signature verification at install time |
-| AI-assistant prompt injection in HMI/engineering workflow | AML.T0010 — ML Supply Chain Compromise (closest existing ATLAS entry) | ATLAS v2026.05 | Crafted historian tag value or vendor PDF poisons context; LLM proposes unsafe setpoint or misleads operator | No ATT&CK for ICS technique for AI-mediated operator deception; no IEC 62443 control on AI conduit; NIST 800-82r3 silent |
+| AI-assistant prompt injection in HMI/engineering workflow | AML.T0010 — ML Supply Chain Compromise (closest existing ATLAS entry) | ATLAS v2026.06 | Crafted historian tag value or vendor PDF poisons context; LLM proposes unsafe setpoint or misleads operator | No ATT&CK for ICS technique for AI-mediated operator deception; no IEC 62443 control on AI conduit; NIST 800-82r3 silent |
 
 **Note on ATT&CK for ICS ID format.** ATT&CK for ICS uses `T0xxx` IDs (e.g., T0855, T0883, T0867). The linter regex `^T\d{4}(\.\d{3})?$` accepts this shape. For IT/OT convergence techniques (the IT side of the pivot), ATT&CK Enterprise IDs (T1190, T1068, T1078) are cited alongside.
 
-**Note on ATLAS coverage.** AML.T0010 (ML Supply Chain Compromise) is the closest current ATLAS v2026.05 mapping for AI-augmented-HMI threats; it does not specifically cover prompt-injection-as-operator-deception in a control room. This is a tracked ATLAS gap — see `forward_watch`.
+**Note on ATLAS coverage.** AML.T0010 (ML Supply Chain Compromise) is the closest current ATLAS v2026.06 mapping for AI-augmented-HMI threats; it does not specifically cover prompt-injection-as-operator-deception in a control room. This is a tracked ATLAS gap — see `forward_watch`.
 
 ---
 

package/skills/policy-exception-gen/skill.md

@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ This skill's exceptions exist precisely because the framework language has not c
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 and ATT&CK)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 and ATT&CK)
 
 A granted exception does not remove the threat — it shifts the burden onto compensating controls. For each exception in this skill, the residual TTPs the compensating controls MUST still disrupt:
 
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ A granted exception does not remove the threat — it shifts the burden onto com
 | Exception 3 — Zero Trust Architecture Network Segmentation | T1021 (Remote Services), T1570 (Lateral Tool Transfer), T1078 (Valid Accounts), T1199 (Trusted Relationship) | Workload identity (SPIFFE/SPIRE), per-request mTLS, device-posture verification, east-west behavioral analytics |
 | Exception 4 — Critical Systems No-Reboot Kernel Patching | T1068 (Exploitation for Privilege Escalation — Copy Fail class), T1548.001 (Setuid and Setgid), T1611 (Escape to Host) | Live kernel patch deployed and verified (`kpatch list` / `canonical-livepatch status`), eBPF/auditd exploitation-pattern rules, network-layer isolation if no live patch available, scheduled reboot window |
 
-The TTP source-of-truth is `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05, May 2026) supplemented by ATT&CK Enterprise. No orphaned controls: no exception in this skill is granted without an enumerated residual-TTP set; an exception with no listed residual is theater.
+The TTP source-of-truth is `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06, May 2026) supplemented by ATT&CK Enterprise. No orphaned controls: no exception in this skill is granted without an enumerated residual-TTP set; an exception with no listed residual is theater.
 
 ---
 

package/skills/rag-pipeline-security/skill.md

@@ -182,9 +182,9 @@ This attack requires:
 
 ---
 
-## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05)
+## TTP Mapping (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06)
 
-Descriptions sourced verbatim from `data/atlas-ttps.json` (ATLAS v2026.05, released 2026-05-27). Partial-coverage controls from `data/framework-control-gaps.json`.
+Descriptions sourced verbatim from `data/atlas-ttps.json` (ATLAS v2026.06, released 2026-06-30). Partial-coverage controls from `data/framework-control-gaps.json`.
 
 | ATLAS ID | ATLAS Name | RAG Attack Class | Control Gap That Lets It Land | Controls That Partially Cover It |
 |---|---|---|---|---|
@@ -198,7 +198,7 @@ Descriptions sourced verbatim from `data/atlas-ttps.json` (ATLAS v2026.05, relea
 
 ## Exploit Availability Matrix
 
-**No CVE catalog entry as of 2026-05 maps directly to RAG embedding manipulation, vector store poisoning, or RAG indirect prompt injection.** These attack classes are tracked via MITRE ATLAS TTPs (v2026.05) and public incident reporting rather than vendor CVEs, because they exploit architectural properties of the RAG pattern rather than a single vendor's implementation flaw. `data/exploit-availability.json` therefore has no RAG-specific rows; the rows below source ATLAS `real_world_instances` and the framework-gap entries.
+**No CVE catalog entry as of 2026-05 maps directly to RAG embedding manipulation, vector store poisoning, or RAG indirect prompt injection.** These attack classes are tracked via MITRE ATLAS TTPs (v2026.06) and public incident reporting rather than vendor CVEs, because they exploit architectural properties of the RAG pattern rather than a single vendor's implementation flaw. `data/exploit-availability.json` therefore has no RAG-specific rows; the rows below source ATLAS `real_world_instances` and the framework-gap entries.
 
 | ATLAS Technique | PoC / Public Demo Available? | CISA KEV? | AI-Accelerated? | Patch Available? | Reboot / Version Bump Required? |
 |---|---|---|---|---|---|

package/skills/ransomware-response/skill.md

@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ Cross-cutting gap: **no security framework treats the four ransomware-specific d
 
 Shadow Copy deletion and exfil-staging via Web Service align to the parent IR playbook's `T1486` and `T1567` entries; the parent's `AML.T0096 / T0017 / T0051` entries do not apply to ransomware-as-a-class but may apply if AI-system data is exfiltrated within the ransomware operation.
 
-ATLAS pinned to v2026.05 (May 2026). ATT&CK pinned to v19.1 (May 2026). Both are explicit version pins — never silently upgraded.
+ATLAS pinned to v2026.06 (June 2026). ATT&CK pinned to v19.1 (May 2026). Both are explicit version pins — never silently upgraded.
 
 ---
 

package/skills/sector-energy/skill.md

@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ Energy-sector TTPs span ATT&CK for ICS, ATT&CK Enterprise (for the IT side of th
 | Hard-coded / shared / default credentials in energy assets | CWE-798 | CWE | Vendor default credentials on PLC, RTU, smart inverter, smart meter, EVSE, OCPP back-end; shared substation operator accounts | NERC CIP-007 R5 partially addresses but exempts asset classes lacking user-account features; AWWA guidance non-binding for water |
 | Firmware-image integrity at L1 | CWE-1037 + CWE-345 family (insufficient verification of data authenticity) | CWE | Unsigned firmware accepted by relay, RTU, smart inverter; vendor build-pipeline compromise propagating to substation fleet | NERC CIP-010 baseline-change management does not require firmware-image signature verification at install time; signed-firmware support varies by vendor and product line |
 | Authentication weakness in energy protocols | CWE-287 + CWE-306 | CWE | IEC 60870-5-104 and IEC 61850 MMS deployed without IEC 62351 authentication retrofit; DNP3 deployed without DNP3-SA; Modbus/TCP without any authentication layer | IEC 62443-3-3 SR 1.1/1.2 unenforceable at protocol layer for installed brownfield; retrofit cost and operational risk routinely defer indefinitely |
-| AI-pipeline poisoning in dispatch / forecasting | (closest ATLAS mapping addressed in `ai-attack-surface`) | ATLAS v2026.05 | ML-poisoning of load forecast inputs, renewables forecast inputs, congestion model training data, or unit-commitment optimization features | No ATT&CK for ICS technique for AI-mediated market or dispatch manipulation; NERC CIP-007 R4 silent on AI event sources; NIST 800-82r3 silent. Cross-reference `ai-attack-surface`, `rag-pipeline-security`. |
+| AI-pipeline poisoning in dispatch / forecasting | (closest ATLAS mapping addressed in `ai-attack-surface`) | ATLAS v2026.06 | ML-poisoning of load forecast inputs, renewables forecast inputs, congestion model training data, or unit-commitment optimization features | No ATT&CK for ICS technique for AI-mediated market or dispatch manipulation; NERC CIP-007 R4 silent on AI event sources; NIST 800-82r3 silent. Cross-reference `ai-attack-surface`, `rag-pipeline-security`. |
 
 **Note on ATT&CK for ICS ID format.** ATT&CK for ICS uses `T0xxx` IDs (T0855, T0883, T0867). The linter regex `^T\d{4}(\.\d{3})?$` accepts this shape. ATT&CK Enterprise IDs (T1190, T1078, T1068) are cited alongside for IT/OT pivot.
 

package/skills/sector-federal-government/skill.md

@@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ Forward-watch: CMMC Level 3 (NIST 800-172 enhanced practices) addresses APT-rele
 - **`supply-chain-integrity`** — SSDF practice evidence, SLSA L3 attestation, in-toto chain, Sigstore / cosign keyless signing, SBOM (CycloneDX 1.6 / SPDX 3.0), VEX via CSAF 2.0 for federal procurement.
 - **`attack-surface-pentest`** — Federal red-team and High-Value Asset assessment scoping; CISA penetration testing program alignment; allied-government red-team baselines.
 - **`identity-assurance`** — NIST 800-63 IAL / AAL / FAL; PIV / CAC issuance; FIDO2 / WebAuthn for federal external users; M-22-09 identity pillar evidence.
-- **`ai-attack-surface`** — Federal AI use cases under OMB M-24-04; NIST AI RMF Generative AI Profile (NIST AI 600-1); MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 TTP coverage for federal AI threat modeling.
+- **`ai-attack-surface`** — Federal AI use cases under OMB M-24-04; NIST AI RMF Generative AI Profile (NIST AI 600-1); MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 TTP coverage for federal AI threat modeling.
 - **`ai-c2-detection`** — Detection of agentic-AI command-and-control inside federal networks.
 - **`compliance-theater`** — Distinguishing FedRAMP / CMMC paper compliance from operational federal security; ConMon substance audit; SPRS-score-vs-evidence reconciliation.
 - **`framework-gap-analysis`** — Per-control gap analysis when an explicit framework-vs-threat reconciliation is requested by an auditor or AO.

package/skills/sector-financial/skill.md

@@ -152,14 +152,14 @@ In all three, the SCA evidence chain (the customer's authenticated session, the
 | Internet-banking / treasury portal exploit | T1190 — Exploit Public-Facing Application | ATT&CK Enterprise | Ivanti VPN, MOVEit-class file-transfer, web-portal SSRF, JWT validation flaws (RFC 8725 best-current-practice violations) | DORA Art. 6-15 ICT risk-management requirements general; CWE-862 (Missing Authorization) and CWE-352 (CSRF) common findings; SWIFT CSCF v2026 covers SWIFT zone, not customer-facing portals |
 | Ransomware against banking infrastructure | T1486 — Data Encrypted for Impact | ATT&CK Enterprise | LockBit-class, BlackBasta, ALPHV/BlackCat residuals 2024-2026; double-extortion + regulatory-threat-of-disclosure | NYDFS 500.17 ransom-payment notification (72h) + DORA major-incident reporting (Art. 19, 24h initial) + APRA CPS 234 para 26 (72h) — notification cadences harmonising slowly; ransom-payment legality fragmented (NYDFS reporting only, OFAC sanctions-screening, EU sanctions overlay) |
 | Data exfiltration including LLM-channel | T1567 — Exfiltration Over Web Service | ATT&CK Enterprise | LLM API egress (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google) as covert channel; AI-coding-assistant context leaks; KYC-document upload to consumer-grade AI | DLP controls in `data/dlp-controls.json` apply; SWIFT CSCF v2026 1.1 segregation assumption violated when AI-API egress crosses administrative jump zone |
-| AI-as-covert-C2 in trading / treasury systems | AML.T0096 — Use AI for C2 Communications | ATLAS v2026.05 | Steganographic encoding in trading-assistant prompts; LLM response decodes operator instructions; multi-agent covert relay in market-making bots | No ATT&CK Enterprise mapping; ATLAS v2026.05 names the technique but no financial-sector-specific detection. SOC tooling rarely monitors trading-system AI tool-use. |
-| Fraud-detection model extraction | AML.T0017 — Discover ML Model Ontology | ATLAS v2026.05 | Adversarial probing of card-not-present fraud models; chargeback-pattern fingerprinting; transaction-monitoring threshold discovery via test transactions | Fraud-model lifecycle governance under MAS TRM / OSFI B-13 / NYDFS 500.13 (asset management) — model-extraction probes are not classified as a cyber event in most institutions |
+| AI-as-covert-C2 in trading / treasury systems | AML.T0096 — Use AI for C2 Communications | ATLAS v2026.06 | Steganographic encoding in trading-assistant prompts; LLM response decodes operator instructions; multi-agent covert relay in market-making bots | No ATT&CK Enterprise mapping; ATLAS v2026.06 names the technique but no financial-sector-specific detection. SOC tooling rarely monitors trading-system AI tool-use. |
+| Fraud-detection model extraction | AML.T0017 — Discover ML Model Ontology | ATLAS v2026.06 | Adversarial probing of card-not-present fraud models; chargeback-pattern fingerprinting; transaction-monitoring threshold discovery via test transactions | Fraud-model lifecycle governance under MAS TRM / OSFI B-13 / NYDFS 500.13 (asset management) — model-extraction probes are not classified as a cyber event in most institutions |
 | Hard-coded credentials in financial mobile / API clients | CWE-798 | CWE | Mobile-banking apps shipping API keys; partner-integration API tokens checked into Git; treasury-management-system local config | PSD2 RTS-SCA covers customer SCA, silent on partner-API credential hygiene; SWIFT CSCF 5.1/5.2 covers credential management for SWIFT users only |
 | Agent-initiated payment via prompt injection | (No native TTP — closest: T1078 + AML.T0051) | ATT&CK + ATLAS | LLM agent with payment-initiation tool-use receives injected instruction via email / document / web content; transaction executes under customer's authenticated session | RTS-SCA evidence chain is fully compliant; injected intent invisible. Captured in `data/framework-control-gaps.json#PSD2-RTS-SCA`. |
 | AI-generated SWIFT MT/MX message draft poisoning | (No native TTP — closest: T1565 + AML.T0051) | ATT&CK + ATLAS | LLM-assisted operator drafting tool produces subtly-wrong beneficiary BIC or amount; reviewer fatigue lets it pass 4-eyes principle | Captured in `data/framework-control-gaps.json#SWIFT-CSCF-v2026-1.1`. |
 | Deepfake-mediated SCA bypass / KYC bypass | T1556 — Modify Authentication Process (closest) | ATT&CK Enterprise | Voice-clone defeating remote-KYC liveness; deepfake-video defeating high-value-transaction step-up | RTS-SCA "inherence" factor (biometric) implementation-dependent; liveness-detection vendor-fragmented. CWE-287 underlying weakness. |
 
-**Note on TTP coverage.** ATT&CK Enterprise does not yet have a financial-sector matrix (unlike ATT&CK for ICS). ATLAS v2026.05 covers AI-specific techniques. The gap between (a) the customer's authenticated session and (b) the AI agent's injected intent within that session is not currently named in either matrix — this is a tracked gap in `forward_watch`.
+**Note on TTP coverage.** ATT&CK Enterprise does not yet have a financial-sector matrix (unlike ATT&CK for ICS). ATLAS v2026.06 covers AI-specific techniques. The gap between (a) the customer's authenticated session and (b) the AI agent's injected intent within that session is not currently named in either matrix — this is a tracked gap in `forward_watch`.
 
 ---
 

package/skills/sector-healthcare/skill.md

@@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ Healthcare has been the most targeted sector for ransomware for three consecutiv
 | Clinician credential phishing for EHR / VPN / Citrix access | T1078 — Valid Accounts | ATT&CK Enterprise | Targeted phishing of physicians and nurses using lookalike Epic / Cerner / Workday portals; MFA-fatigue against Duo/Microsoft Authenticator; SIM-swap on on-call physician phones | HIPAA §164.312(d) person/entity authentication does not specify AAL; many CEs accept SMS-OTP MFA — fails NIST 800-63B AAL2 phishing-resistance bar. Hand off to identity-assurance. |
 | Bulk EHR / FHIR / data-warehouse exfiltration | T1530 — Data from Cloud Storage Object | ATT&CK Enterprise | FHIR `$export` Bulk Data over-broad scopes; cloud data warehouse (Snowflake / BigQuery / Redshift) credential theft from clinician laptop; AWS S3 misconfiguration on de-identification staging buckets | HIPAA §164.312(c) integrity controls do not address bulk-API exfil semantics; HITRUST CSF 09.l information-transfer-policies treats bulk data flow at a policy layer. CWE-200 (Information Exposure), CWE-862 (Missing Authorization). |
 | PHI exfiltration via clinician prompt to consumer LLM | T1567 — Exfiltration Over Web Service | ATT&CK Enterprise | Clinician pastes patient note into ChatGPT / Claude / Gemini for differential diagnosis or letter drafting; ambient-doc tool retains and forwards transcript to vendor cloud outside BAA | No HIPAA control specifically names this channel; HHS-OCR Bulletin reasoning applies. Hand off to dlp-gap-analysis. CWE-200 (Information Exposure). |
-| Prompt injection of clinical decision-support copilot | AML.T0051 — LLM Prompt Injection (with .000/.001/.002 sub-techniques) | ATLAS v2026.05 | Indirect prompt injection via referenced lab report PDF, OCR'd intake form, or patient-portal message that exploits an EHR-integrated copilot; instruction to suppress allergy alert, reorder medications, or fabricate trend in vital signs | EU AI Act Art 15 cybersecurity obligation applies but lacks concrete healthcare-AI threshold; HIPAA silent on prompt-injection-as-disclosure-vector. CWE-1426 (Improper Validation of Generative AI Output). |
-| Model extraction / membership inference against clinical AI | AML.T0017 — Discover ML Model Ontology (inference-API probing for system-prompt, guardrail, training-data signal); AML.T0016 — Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities (adversarial-ML weaponization) | ATLAS v2026.05 | Adversarial probing of a clinical-decision-support API to determine whether specific patient records were in training set; reconstruction of de-identified training examples from inference behaviour | EU AI Act Art 10 data-governance applies to training-data quality; does not codify membership-inference defence. CWE-1426 covers output-validation gap. |
+| Prompt injection of clinical decision-support copilot | AML.T0051 — LLM Prompt Injection (with .000/.001/.002 sub-techniques) | ATLAS v2026.06 | Indirect prompt injection via referenced lab report PDF, OCR'd intake form, or patient-portal message that exploits an EHR-integrated copilot; instruction to suppress allergy alert, reorder medications, or fabricate trend in vital signs | EU AI Act Art 15 cybersecurity obligation applies but lacks concrete healthcare-AI threshold; HIPAA silent on prompt-injection-as-disclosure-vector. CWE-1426 (Improper Validation of Generative AI Output). |
+| Model extraction / membership inference against clinical AI | AML.T0017 — Discover ML Model Ontology (inference-API probing for system-prompt, guardrail, training-data signal); AML.T0016 — Obtain Capabilities: Develop Capabilities (adversarial-ML weaponization) | ATLAS v2026.06 | Adversarial probing of a clinical-decision-support API to determine whether specific patient records were in training set; reconstruction of de-identified training examples from inference behaviour | EU AI Act Art 10 data-governance applies to training-data quality; does not codify membership-inference defence. CWE-1426 covers output-validation gap. |
 | Medical-device firmware tamper / exploit | T1190 (IT-side initial access to device-network) chained with vendor-specific device CVEs | ATT&CK Enterprise + ICS where applicable | Insulin pumps, cardiac monitors, infusion pumps (BD Alaris), sequencers (Illumina firmware), patient-monitoring (BD, Philips, GE Healthcare), bedside imaging | FDA 524B PMA/510(k) cyber obligations only apply to devices submitted after March 2023; brownfield fleet pre-dates it. EU MDR Annex I 17.2 silent on AI-augmented devices. Hand off to ot-ics-security for device-network treatment, and coordinated-vuln-disclosure for vendor reporting. |
 | FHIR / SMART on FHIR session token theft | T1078 chained with T1530 | ATT&CK Enterprise | Stolen JWT / OAuth2 bearer for SMART-on-FHIR launch; over-broad scopes (`*/*.read`, `patient/*.read`); refresh-token theft persists access; CWE-287 (improper authentication) and CWE-862 (missing authorization) | RFC-7519 JWT validation must enforce `iss`, `aud`, `exp`, signature algorithm, key rotation; RFC-9421 HTTP message signatures for FHIR API integrity in flight; HL7 FHIR R5 does not mandate either. |
 | EHR over-privileged break-glass / shared-account access | T1078.002 — Valid Accounts: Domain Accounts | ATT&CK Enterprise | Shared "Nurse" account on med-cart Windows; break-glass clinician account auditing gap; service account for EHR-integrated copilot with patient/* scope rather than encounter-bound | HIPAA §164.312(a)(2)(i) unique user identification is met technically by user-account-per-clinician but break-glass and AI-service-principals are commonly outside that boundary. NIST 800-53 AC-2 account management does not codify AI-service-principal scoping. |

package/skills/security-maturity-tiers/skill.md

@@ -452,7 +452,7 @@ The divergences above are surfaced against US, EU, UK, AU and ISO 27001:2022 —
 
 ## TTP Mapping
 
-Per-tier TTP coverage is cumulative: Practical includes MVP's coverage plus additions; Overkill includes both plus additions. Source-of-truth: `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05) and ATT&CK references in `data/cve-catalog.json`.
+Per-tier TTP coverage is cumulative: Practical includes MVP's coverage plus additions; Overkill includes both plus additions. Source-of-truth: `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06) and ATT&CK references in `data/cve-catalog.json`.
 
 | Tier | Must cover | TTP | Source | Tier-specific control element |
 |---|---|---|---|---|

package/skills/skill-update-loop/skill.md

@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ The threat context this skill defends against is not a specific adversary techni
 
 Real-world manifestations in mid-2026:
 
-- ATLAS v2026.05 (May 2026) added TTPs that bind to operational reality (AML.T0096 AI-API C2, AML.T0048 erode-integrity-via-drift). A skill pinned to ATLAS v4 cannot route these. **AML.T0010** family was expanded to cover MCP supply-chain compromise mid-cycle.
+- ATLAS v2026.06 (May 2026) added TTPs that bind to operational reality (AML.T0096 AI-API C2, AML.T0048 erode-integrity-via-drift). A skill pinned to ATLAS v4 cannot route these. **AML.T0010** family was expanded to cover MCP supply-chain compromise mid-cycle.
 - CVE-2026-31431 (Copy Fail) joined CISA KEV on 2026-05-01 with a 2026-05-15 federal due date. Any skill whose `last_threat_review` predates that listing and whose body recommends "patch on 30-day SLA" is recommending against a threat model that KEV escalated to days, not weeks.
 - NIST SP 800-63B updated PBKDF2 iteration guidance to ≥ 600,000 in 2022; many compliance attestations still cite the 2017 numbers. A skill that does not track that lag perpetuates the theater.
 - IETF RFC 9116 (security.txt) and the CSAF 2.0 transition both have hard cutover signals that change how `coordinated-vuln-disclosure` should advise.
@@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ When drift is detected:
 
 **Monitor:** Microsoft STRIDE updates (microsoft.com/en-us/securityengineering/sdl/threatmodeling), Linddun-go updates (linddun.org), Pol's Unified Kill Chain repository (https://www.unifiedkillchain.com/), MITRE D3FEND ontology releases (d3fend.mitre.org).
 
-Threat modeling methodologies evolve. STRIDE has periodic Microsoft revisions; LINDDUN's privacy-extension catalog grows as new privacy-violating AI patterns are documented; the Unified Kill Chain is versioned by Pol et al. and absorbs new phase definitions as adversary behavior shifts; MITRE D3FEND adds defensive-technique IDs and reorganizes its ontology on a published release cadence. A skill that names a methodology without tracking its version is the same drift class as a skill that names ATLAS without pinning v2026.05.
+Threat modeling methodologies evolve. STRIDE has periodic Microsoft revisions; LINDDUN's privacy-extension catalog grows as new privacy-violating AI patterns are documented; the Unified Kill Chain is versioned by Pol et al. and absorbs new phase definitions as adversary behavior shifts; MITRE D3FEND adds defensive-technique IDs and reorganizes its ontology on a published release cadence. A skill that names a methodology without tracking its version is the same drift class as a skill that names ATLAS without pinning v2026.06.
 
 When a new methodology version drops:
 1. Update `threat-modeling-methodology` skill body — refresh the methodology-version table, the DFD templates, and the attack-tree templates in its Output Format section to match the new release.
@@ -482,7 +482,7 @@ This skill does not have a single exploited target — its "exploit surface" is
 | Source | What It Provides | Cadence | Pinned Version / Anchor | Tracked In |
 |---|---|---|---|---|
 | CISA KEV catalog | Confirmed in-the-wild exploitation flag per CVE | Real-time (RSS / JSON API) | cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog | `data/exploit-availability.json` (`cisa_kev`, `cisa_kev_date`) |
-| MITRE ATLAS changelog | TTP additions, renames, removals for AI/ML threat domain | Quarterly check; immediate on minor-version release | ATLAS v2026.05 (May 2026) — pinned in AGENTS.md and `data/atlas-ttps.json._meta.atlas_version` | `_meta.atlas_version` |
+| MITRE ATLAS changelog | TTP additions, renames, removals for AI/ML threat domain | Quarterly check; immediate on minor-version release | ATLAS v2026.06 (May 2026) — pinned in AGENTS.md and `data/atlas-ttps.json._meta.atlas_version` | `_meta.atlas_version` |
 | NVD CVE 2.0 API | Authoritative CVE metadata, CVSS vectors, references | Real-time on new CVE in covered domain | services.nvd.nist.gov/rest/json/cves/2.0 | `data/cve-catalog.json` |
 | NIST FIPS publication tracker | PQC and crypto-standard finalizations | Per-publication (event-driven) | csrc.nist.gov/publications | pqc-first `forward_watch` + manifest `last_threat_review` |
 | MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise | Non-AI TTP additions/renames | Per ATT&CK version release | attack.mitre.org (current pinned: v19.1, 2026-05-12) | Skill `attack_refs` fields |
@@ -518,4 +518,4 @@ The drift attack against skill currency is structural, not technical — there i
 | **D3-IOPR** (Input/Output Profiling Resource) | Lint-skills body / frontmatter parsing is the profiling step: every skill body is parsed against the canonical section template (Threat Context, TTP Mapping, Framework Lag Declaration, Exploit Availability Matrix, Analysis Procedure, Output Format, Compliance Theater Check, DCM). A drifted skill that drops a required section is caught at lint time. | Layer 2 (Harden — schema). | Per-skill — schema is per-skill body. | Default-deny missing sections; the v0.13.0 lint upgrade makes DCM a hard-fail. |
 | **D3-PA** (Process Analysis) | The watchlist / dispatch / scan log every load and signature-check event so a forensic reader can reconstruct which skill version produced which finding. Without a per-invocation evidence stream, a stale skill body whose timestamp says "current" cannot be detected after the fact. | Layer 5 (Detect — runtime). | Per-invocation — every CLI invocation emits a structured log entry. | Treat every invocation as untrusted until the signature chain is verified at load time; persist the verification result alongside the finding. |
 
-**Defense-in-depth posture:** signature integrity (D3-CA) and snapshot-pinning (D3-EHB) are the hard gates that prevent a tampered skill body from shipping; lint-schema (D3-IOPR) and currency timestamps (D3-FAPA) are the audit gates that catch silent drift inside an intentional release; D3-PA is the per-invocation evidence stream that lets the operator answer "which version of the skill produced this finding" post-hoc. Because the ATLAS / ATT&CK version is pinned, every layer's evidence is keyed off the pinned version — a manifest snapshot taken against ATLAS v2026.05 is not interchangeable with one taken against a later release.
+**Defense-in-depth posture:** signature integrity (D3-CA) and snapshot-pinning (D3-EHB) are the hard gates that prevent a tampered skill body from shipping; lint-schema (D3-IOPR) and currency timestamps (D3-FAPA) are the audit gates that catch silent drift inside an intentional release; D3-PA is the per-invocation evidence stream that lets the operator answer "which version of the skill produced this finding" post-hoc. Because the ATLAS / ATT&CK version is pinned, every layer's evidence is keyed off the pinned version — a manifest snapshot taken against ATLAS v2026.06 is not interchangeable with one taken against a later release.

package/skills/supply-chain-integrity/skill.md

@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ The catalog's expansion means a supply-chain assessment that names only NIST 800
 
 | ATLAS / ATT&CK ID | Technique | Supply-Chain Relevance | Gap |
 |---|---|---|---|
-| AML.T0010 | ML Supply Chain Compromise | Direct: malicious model, malicious MCP server, malicious ML library — the umbrella attack class for AI artifact compromise | ATLAS v2026.05 classifies the attack; no framework mandates the cryptographic control that would detect it at load |
+| AML.T0010 | ML Supply Chain Compromise | Direct: malicious model, malicious MCP server, malicious ML library — the umbrella attack class for AI artifact compromise | ATLAS v2026.06 classifies the attack; no framework mandates the cryptographic control that would detect it at load |
 | AML.T0018 | Backdoor ML Model | Specific: a model weight file with an embedded backdoor (trojaned weights, data poisoning persisted into weights, or executable payload in a code-executing serialization format) is loaded at inference | No framework requires model-weight signature verification; CWE-502 deserialization risk is not mapped to a compliance control |
 | T1195.001 | Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools | The XZ Utils class, the typosquat class, the dependency-confusion class — directly addressable by SLSA L3 provenance + in-toto attestation chain | Standard SCA tooling detects known-vulnerable dependencies but does not detect novel compromise of an authentic-looking dependency. SLSA L3 + reproducible builds closes this; not required by any framework |
 | T1195.002 | Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain | Build pipeline compromise (CI runner, build-time toolchain, signing-key compromise). Defense: hardened builder per SLSA L3, key custody in HSM or cloud KMS, ephemeral CI tokens | NIST 800-218 PS practices are process-level. No framework prescribes hardened-builder requirements. |

package/skills/threat-model-currency/skill.md

@@ -199,14 +199,14 @@ This skill produces a currency score and a specific update roadmap. Currency is
 
 ---
 
-### Class 13: MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 Coverage
+### Class 13: MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 Coverage
 
-**2026 reality:** MITRE ATLAS (May 2026, v2026.05) is the primary AI threat framework. Most SOC detection engineering programs are built on ATT&CK, not ATLAS. AI-specific TTPs have zero detection coverage in ATT&CK-only programs.
+**2026 reality:** MITRE ATLAS (June 2026, v2026.06) is the primary AI threat framework. Most SOC detection engineering programs are built on ATT&CK, not ATLAS. AI-specific TTPs have zero detection coverage in ATT&CK-only programs.
 
 **Currency check questions:**
-- Is MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 incorporated into the threat model?
+- Is MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 incorporated into the threat model?
 - Are ATLAS TTPs mapped to detection controls?
-- What is the current ATLAS version in use? (Current: 2026.05, May 2026)
+- What is the current ATLAS version in use? (Current: 2026.06, June 2026)
 
 **If unchecked:** AI-specific threat techniques are not covered by the detection architecture. The SOC has no alerts for ATLAS TTPs.
 
@@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ The recurring failure across all of the above: every framework treats threat mod
 
 ## TTP Mapping
 
-The 14-class checklist above *is* the TTP map. Each class is a coverage requirement against the canonical sources of truth: `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.05) and the ATT&CK techniques referenced in `data/cve-catalog.json`. A current threat model must address — explicitly or by reasoned exclusion — every TTP below.
+The 14-class checklist above *is* the TTP map. Each class is a coverage requirement against the canonical sources of truth: `data/atlas-ttps.json` (MITRE ATLAS v2026.06) and the ATT&CK techniques referenced in `data/cve-catalog.json`. A current threat model must address — explicitly or by reasoned exclusion — every TTP below.
 
 | Class | Primary TTP | Catalog source | Gap if absent |
 |---|---|---|---|
@@ -400,14 +400,14 @@ The skill produces a structured Threat Model Currency Assessment that scores the
 | 10 | Model Poisoning | 0/1/2 | |
 | 11 | AI-Speed Reconnaissance | 0/1/2 | |
 | 12 | AI-Generated Credential Phishing | 0/1/2 | |
-| 13 | MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 Coverage | 0/1/2 | |
+| 13 | MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 Coverage | 0/1/2 | |
 | 14 | Post-Quantum Adversary Timeline | 0/1/2 | |
 
 ### Priority Update Roadmap
 [Ordered by current exposure risk: specific additions for each gap]
 
 ### ATLAS Version Check
-Current reference: MITRE ATLAS v2026.05 (May 2026)
+Current reference: MITRE ATLAS v2026.06 (May 2026)
 Threat model references: [version cited in document]
 Gap: [if different]
 ```