Awesome-omni-skills privacy-by-design
Privacy by Design workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs building apps that collect user data. Ensures privacy protections are built in from the start\u2014data minimization, consent, encryption and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
git clone https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skills
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/privacy-by-design" ~/.claude/skills/diegosouzapw-awesome-omni-skills-privacy-by-design && rm -rf "$T"
skills/privacy-by-design/SKILL.mdPrivacy by Design
Overview
This public intake copy packages
plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/privacy-by-design from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.
Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.
This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses
metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.
Privacy by Design
Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: Legal Frameworks, User Rights (GDPR), Deep Dive: Why It Matters, Common Pitfalls, Third-Party Audit, Implementation Checklist.
When to Use This Skill
Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.
- Use when building apps that collect personal data (names, emails, locations, preferences)
- Use when designing database schemas, APIs, or authentication flows
- Use when the user mentions forms, user accounts, analytics, or third-party integrations
- Use when deploying to production—verify privacy controls before launch
- Use when the request clearly matches the imported source intent: building apps that collect user data. Ensures privacy protections are built in from the start—data minimization, consent, encryption.
- Use when the operator should preserve upstream workflow detail instead of rewriting the process from scratch.
Operating Table
| Situation | Start here | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| First-time use | | Confirms repository, branch, commit, and imported path before touching the copied workflow |
| Provenance review | | Gives reviewers a plain-language audit trail for the imported source |
| Workflow execution | | Starts with the smallest copied file that materially changes execution |
| Supporting context | | Adds the next most relevant copied source file without loading the entire package |
| Handoff decision | | Helps the operator switch to a stronger native skill when the task drifts |
Workflow
This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.
- Confirm the user goal, the scope of the imported workflow, and whether this skill is still the right router for the task.
- Read the overview and provenance files before loading any copied upstream support files.
- Load only the references, examples, prompts, or scripts that materially change the outcome for the current request.
- Execute the upstream workflow while keeping provenance and source boundaries explicit in the working notes.
- Validate the result against the upstream expectations and the evidence you can point to in the copied files.
- Escalate or hand off to a related skill when the work moves out of this imported workflow's center of gravity.
- Before merge or closure, record what was used, what changed, and what the reviewer still needs to verify.
Imported Workflow Notes
Imported: Overview
Integrate privacy protections into software architecture from the beginning, not as an afterthought. This skill applies Privacy by Design principles (GDPR Article 25, Cavoukian's framework) when designing databases, APIs, and user flows. Protects real users' data and builds trust.
Imported: Legal Frameworks
GDPR (EU) — Primary reference. Article 25 mandates "data protection by design and by default." Applies to EU users and often adopted globally.
CCPA (California) — Right to know, delete, opt-out of sale. Similar principles: minimize, disclose, allow control.
LGPD (Brazil) — Aligned with GDPR. Purpose limitation, necessity, transparency. Applies to Brazil users.
Design for the strictest framework you target; it often satisfies others.
Examples
Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly
Use @privacy-by-design to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.
Explanation: This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.
Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review
Review @privacy-by-design against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.
Explanation: Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.
Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution
Use @privacy-by-design for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.
Explanation: This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.
Example 4: Build a reviewer packet
Review @privacy-by-design using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.
Explanation: This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.
Imported Usage Notes
Imported: Code Examples
JavaScript/Node — Minimal User Model
// BAD: Collecting everything "just in case" const user = { email, name, phone, address, birthdate, ipAddress, userAgent, ... }; // GOOD: Minimal, documented purpose const user = { email, // purpose: authentication displayName, // purpose: UI display createdAt, // purpose: account age };
JavaScript — Consent Before Tracking
// BAD: Track first, ask later analytics.track(userId, event); // GOOD: Check consent first if (userConsent.analytics) { analytics.track(userId, event); }
Python — Safe Logging
# BAD: Logging PII in plain text logger.info(f"User {user.email} logged in from {request.remote_addr}") # GOOD: Redact or hash identifiers logger.info(f"User {hash_user_id(user.id)} logged in") # Or: logger.info("User login", extra={"user_id_hash": hash_id(user.id)})
SQL — Schema with Purpose and Retention
-- GOOD: Document purpose and retention in schema CREATE TABLE users ( id UUID PRIMARY KEY, email VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL, -- purpose: auth, retention: account lifetime display_name VARCHAR(100), -- purpose: UI, retention: account lifetime created_at TIMESTAMPTZ, -- purpose: audit, retention: 7 years last_login_at TIMESTAMPTZ -- purpose: security, retention: 90 days ); -- Add retention policy (PostgreSQL example) -- Schedule job to anonymize/delete last_login_at after 90 days
API — Return Only Needed Fields
# BAD: Returning full user object return jsonify(user) # May include internal fields, hashed passwords # GOOD: Explicit allowlist return jsonify({ "id": user.id, "email": user.email, "displayName": user.display_name, })
Best Practices
Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.
- ✅ Ask "do we need this?" for every new data field
- ✅ Design deletion and export flows from day one
- ✅ Use hashing or tokenization for sensitive identifiers when possible
- ✅ Document purpose and retention in schema or metadata
- ❌ Don't log passwords, tokens, or PII in plain text
- ❌ Don't share data with third parties without explicit consent
- ❌ Don't assume "we'll add privacy later"—it rarely happens
Imported Operating Notes
Imported: Core Principles
1. Data Minimization
Collect only what is strictly necessary. Every field needs a documented justification. Avoid "we might need it later."
2. Purpose Limitation
Store the purpose of each data point. Do not reuse data for purposes the user did not consent to.
3. Storage Limitation
Define retention periods. Implement automated deletion or anonymization when retention expires. Never keep data "forever" by default.
4. Privacy as Default
Opt-in for optional collection, not opt-out. Sensitive settings (analytics, marketing) off by default. No pre-checked consent boxes.
5. End-to-End Security
Encrypt at rest and in transit. Use RBAC. Log access to sensitive data for audit.
6. Transparency
Document what is collected and why. Clear privacy policies. Easy access and deletion for users.
Imported: Best Practices
- ✅ Ask "do we need this?" for every new data field
- ✅ Design deletion and export flows from day one
- ✅ Use hashing or tokenization for sensitive identifiers when possible
- ✅ Document purpose and retention in schema or metadata
- ❌ Don't log passwords, tokens, or PII in plain text
- ❌ Don't share data with third parties without explicit consent
- ❌ Don't assume "we'll add privacy later"—it rarely happens
- ❌ Don't expose stack traces or internal errors to clients
Troubleshooting
Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically
Symptoms: The result ignores the upstream workflow in
plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/privacy-by-design, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all.
Solution: Re-open metadata.json, ORIGIN.md, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Load only the files that materially change the answer, then restate the provenance before continuing.
Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review
Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated
SKILL.md, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task.
Solution: Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.
Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization
Symptoms: The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better. Solution: Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.
Related Skills
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@00-andruia-consultant-v2
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@10-andruia-skill-smith-v2
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@20-andruia-niche-intelligence-v2
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@2d-games
Additional Resources
Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.
| Resource family | What it gives the reviewer | Example path |
|---|---|---|
| copied reference notes, guides, or background material from upstream | |
| worked examples or reusable prompts copied from upstream | |
| upstream helper scripts that change execution or validation | |
| routing or delegation notes that are genuinely part of the imported package | |
| supporting assets or schemas copied from the source package | |
Imported Reference Notes
Imported: User Rights (GDPR)
Ensure these are implementable from day one:
| Right | What to build |
|---|---|
| Access | Endpoint or flow to return all user data |
| Rectification | Ability to update/correct data |
| Erasure | Account deletion + data purge (including backups) |
| Portability | Export data in machine-readable format (JSON, CSV) |
Imported: Deep Dive: Why It Matters
Data minimization — Less data = less breach impact, lower storage cost, simpler compliance. Each field is a liability.
Purpose limitation — Reusing data without consent is illegal under GDPR. Document purpose in schema or metadata.
Retention — Indefinite storage increases risk and violates GDPR. Define
retention_days per data type; automate cleanup.
Logging — Logs often leak PII. Redact emails, IDs, tokens. Use structured logging with allowlists.
Third parties — Every SDK (analytics, crash reporting, ads) may send data elsewhere. Audit dependencies; require consent before loading.
Imported: Common Pitfalls
| Pitfall | Solution |
|---|---|
| Logs contain emails, IPs, tokens | Redact PII; use hashed IDs or structured logs |
| Error messages expose data | Return generic errors to client; log details server-side |
| Third-party SDKs load before consent | Load analytics/ads only after consent; use consent management |
| No deletion flow | Design account deletion + data purge from day one |
| Backups keep data forever | Include backups in retention; encrypt backups |
| Cookies without consent | Use consent banner; respect Do Not Track where applicable |
Imported: Third-Party Audit
Before adding a dependency that touches user data:
- What data does it collect or receive?
- Where does it send data (servers, countries)?
- Is it loaded before or after user consent?
- Can we disable it if user opts out?
- Does their privacy policy align with ours?
Imported: Implementation Checklist
When building a feature that touches user data:
- Is this data necessary? Can we achieve the goal with less?
- Do we have explicit consent for this use?
- Is it encrypted (at rest and in transit)?
- Do we have a retention/deletion policy?
- Can the user export or delete their data?
- Are third-party services disclosed and consented?
- Are logs free of PII?
- Are backups included in retention policy?
Imported: Limitations
- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.