implementing-threat-modeling-with-mitre-attack
Implements threat modeling using the MITRE ATT&CK framework to map adversary TTPs against organizational assets, assess detection coverage gaps, and prioritize defensive investments. Use when SOC teams need to align detection engineering with threat landscape, conduct threat assessments for new environments, or justify security tool procurement.
- License 许可
- Apache-2.0
- 最近更新
- 2026-08-31
- Stars
- ★ 3.6w
- Forks
- 4.4k
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- implementing-threat-modeling-with-mitre-attack
- tags
- [ "soc", "mitre-attack", "threat-modeling", "ttp", "detection-coverage", "attack-navigator", "risk-assessment" ]
- author
- mahipal
- domain
- cybersecurity
- license
- Apache-2.0
- version
- 1.0
- nist_csf
- [ "DE.CM-01", "DE.AE-02", "RS.MA-01", "DE.AE-06" ]
- subdomain
- soc-operations
- description
- Implements threat modeling using the MITRE ATT&CK framework to map adversary TTPs against organizational assets, assess detection coverage gaps, and prioritize defensive investments. Use when SOC teams need to align detection engineering with threat landscape, conduct threat assessments for new environments, or justify security tool procurement.
- nist_ai_rmf
- [ "MEASURE-2.7", "MAP-5.1", "MANAGE-2.4" ]
- mitre_attack
- [ "T1078", "T1685.002", "T1685.005", "T1566" ]
- atlas_techniques
- [ "AML.T0070", "AML.T0066", "AML.T0082" ]
- d3fend_techniques
- [ "File Metadata Consistency Validation", "Application Protocol Command Analysis", "Identifier Analysis", "Content Format Conversion", "Message Analysis" ]
02 资源文件 3
- 许可证LICENSE11.0 KB
- 参考文档references/api-reference.md2.2 KB
- 脚本scripts/agent.py8.1 KB
03 SKILL.md 正文
Implementing Threat Modeling with MITRE ATT&CK
When to Use
Use this skill when:
- SOC teams need to assess detection coverage against relevant threat actors and their TTPs
- Security leadership requires threat-informed defense prioritization
- New environments (cloud migration, OT integration) need detection strategy planning
- Purple team exercises require structured adversary emulation based on threat models
- Annual risk assessments need ATT&CK-based threat landscape analysis
Do not use as a one-time exercise — threat models must be continuously updated as adversary TTPs evolve and organizational attack surface changes.
Prerequisites
- MITRE ATT&CK framework knowledge (Enterprise, ICS, Mobile, or Cloud matrices)
- ATT&CK Navigator tool (web or local) for layer visualization
- Current detection rule inventory mapped to ATT&CK technique IDs
- Threat intelligence on adversary groups targeting your sector
- Organizational asset inventory with criticality classifications
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Relevant Threat Actors
Research adversary groups targeting your sector using MITRE ATT&CK Groups:
import requests
import json
# Download ATT&CK STIX data
response = requests.get(
"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mitre/cti/master/enterprise-attack/enterprise-attack.json"
)
attack_data = response.json()
# Extract groups and their techniques
groups = {}
for obj in attack_data["objects"]:
if obj["type"] == "intrusion-set":
group_name = obj["name"]
aliases = obj.get("aliases", [])
description = obj.get("description", "")
groups[group_name] = {
"aliases": aliases,
"description": description[:200],
"techniques": []
}
# Map techniques to groups via relationships
relationships = [obj for obj in attack_data["objects"] if obj["type"] == "relationship"]
techniques = {obj["id"]: obj for obj in attack_data["objects"]
if obj["type"] == "attack-pattern"}
for rel in relationships:
if rel["relationship_type"] == "uses":
source = rel["source_ref"]
target = rel["target_ref"]
for group_name, group_data in groups.items():
if source == group_data.get("id") and target in techniques:
tech = techniques[target]
ext_refs = tech.get("external_references", [])
for ref in ext_refs:
if ref.get("source_name") == "mitre-attack":
group_data["techniques"].append(ref["external_id"])
# Example: Financial sector threat actors
financial_actors = ["FIN7", "FIN8", "Carbanak", "APT38", "Lazarus Group"]
for actor in financial_actors:
if actor in groups:
print(f"{actor}: {len(groups[actor]['techniques'])} techniques")
print(f" Top techniques: {groups[actor]['techniques'][:10]}")
Step 2: Build Threat Actor TTP Profile
Create ATT&CK Navigator layers for priority threat actors:
import json
def create_attack_layer(actor_name, techniques, color="#ff6666"):
"""Generate ATT&CK Navigator JSON layer for a threat actor"""
layer = {
"name": f"{actor_name} TTP Profile",
"versions": {
"attack": "15",
"navigator": "5.0",
"layer": "4.5"
},
"domain": "enterprise-attack",
"description": f"Techniques associated with {actor_name}",
"techniques": [
{
"techniqueID": tech_id,
"tactic": "",
"color": color,
"comment": f"Used by {actor_name}",
"enabled": True,
"score": 1
}
for tech_id in techniques
],
"gradient": {
"colors": ["#ffffff", color],
"minValue": 0,
"maxValue": 1
}
}
return layer
# Create layers for top threat actors
fin7_techniques = ["T1566.001", "T1059.001", "T1053.005", "T1547.001",
"T1078", "T1021.001", "T1003", "T1071.001", "T1041"]
layer = create_attack_layer("FIN7", fin7_techniques, "#ff6666")
with open("fin7_layer.json", "w") as f:
json.dump(layer, f, indent=2)
Step 3: Map Current Detection Coverage
Export current detection rules mapped to ATT&CK:
--- Extract ATT&CK technique mappings from Splunk ES correlation searches
| rest /services/saved/searches
splunk_server=local
| where match(title, "^(COR|ESCU|RBA):")
| eval techniques = if(isnotnull(action.correlationsearch.annotations),
spath(action.correlationsearch.annotations, "mitre_attack"),
"unmapped")
| stats count by techniques
| mvexpand techniques
| stats count by techniques
| rename techniques AS technique_id, count AS rule_count
Create detection coverage layer:
def create_coverage_layer(detection_rules):
"""Generate coverage layer from detection rule inventory"""
technique_counts = {}
for rule in detection_rules:
for tech in rule.get("techniques", []):
technique_counts[tech] = technique_counts.get(tech, 0) + 1
layer = {
"name": "SOC Detection Coverage",
"versions": {"attack": "15", "navigator": "5.0", "layer": "4.5"},
"domain": "enterprise-attack",
"techniques": [
{
"techniqueID": tech_id,
"color": "#31a354" if count >= 2 else "#a1d99b" if count == 1 else "",
"score": count,
"comment": f"{count} detection rule(s)"
}
for tech_id, count in technique_counts.items()
],
"gradient": {
"colors": ["#ffffff", "#a1d99b", "#31a354"],
"minValue": 0,
"maxValue": 3
}
}
return layer
Step 4: Perform Gap Analysis
Overlay threat actor TTPs against detection coverage:
def gap_analysis(threat_techniques, covered_techniques):
"""Identify detection gaps for specific threat actor"""
gaps = set(threat_techniques) - set(covered_techniques)
covered = set(threat_techniques) & set(covered_techniques)
print(f"Threat Actor Techniques: {len(threat_techniques)}")
print(f"Detected: {len(covered)} ({len(covered)/len(threat_techniques)*100:.0f}%)")
print(f"Gaps: {len(gaps)} ({len(gaps)/len(threat_techniques)*100:.0f}%)")
# Prioritize gaps by kill chain phase
priority_order = {
"TA0001": 1, "TA0002": 2, "TA0003": 3, "TA0004": 4,
"TA0005": 5, "TA0006": 6, "TA0007": 7, "TA0008": 8,
"TA0009": 9, "TA0010": 10, "TA0011": 11, "TA0040": 12
}
gap_details = []
for tech_id in gaps:
gap_details.append({
"technique": tech_id,
"priority": "HIGH" if tech_id.split(".")[0] in ["T1003", "T1021", "T1059"] else "MEDIUM",
"recommendation": f"Build detection for {tech_id}"
})
return {
"total_actor_techniques": len(threat_techniques),
"covered": len(covered),
"gaps": len(gaps),
"coverage_pct": round(len(covered)/len(threat_techniques)*100, 1),
"gap_details": sorted(gap_details, key=lambda x: x["priority"])
}
# Run analysis
result = gap_analysis(fin7_techniques, current_coverage)
Step 5: Create Prioritized Remediation Plan
Build a detection engineering roadmap:
threat_model_remediation_plan:
assessed_date: 2024-03-15
primary_threats:
- FIN7 (Financial sector)
- APT38 (DPRK financial)
- Lazarus Group (Destructive)
current_coverage: 64%
target_coverage: 80%
priority_1_gaps: # 30-day target
- technique: T1021.002
name: SMB/Windows Admin Shares
data_source: Windows Security Event 5140
effort: Low
detection_approach: Monitor admin share access from non-admin workstations
- technique: T1003.006
name: DCSync
data_source: Windows Security Event 4662
effort: Medium
detection_approach: Detect DS-Replication-Get-Changes from non-DC sources
priority_2_gaps: # 60-day target
- technique: T1055
name: Process Injection
data_source: Sysmon EventCode 8, 10
effort: High
detection_approach: Monitor cross-process memory access patterns
- technique: T1071.001
name: Web Protocols (C2)
data_source: Proxy/Firewall logs
effort: Medium
detection_approach: Detect beaconing patterns in HTTP/S traffic
priority_3_gaps: # 90-day target
- technique: T1070.004
name: File Deletion
data_source: Sysmon EventCode 23
effort: Low
detection_approach: Monitor mass file deletion in sensitive directories
Step 6: Validate with Adversary Emulation
Test coverage using MITRE Caldera or Atomic Red Team:
# Using Atomic Red Team to validate coverage for FIN7 techniques
# T1566.001 — Spearphishing Attachment
Invoke-AtomicTest T1566.001
# T1059.001 — PowerShell
Invoke-AtomicTest T1059.001 -TestNumbers 1,2,3
# T1053.005 — Scheduled Task
Invoke-AtomicTest T1053.005
# T1547.001 — Registry Run Keys
Invoke-AtomicTest T1547.001
# T1003 — Credential Dumping
Invoke-AtomicTest T1003 -TestNumbers 1,2
# Verify detections
# Check SIEM for corresponding alerts within 15 minutes
Document emulation results to validate threat model accuracy.
Key Concepts
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| MITRE ATT&CK | Knowledge base of adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures based on real-world observations |
| TTP | Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures — the behavioral patterns of adversary groups |
| ATT&CK Navigator | Web tool for visualizing ATT&CK matrices as layered heatmaps showing coverage or threat profiles |
| Gap Analysis | Process of comparing threat actor TTPs against detection coverage to identify blind spots |
| Threat-Informed Defense | Security strategy prioritizing defenses based on actual adversary behaviors rather than theoretical risks |
| Adversary Emulation | Controlled simulation of threat actor TTPs to validate detection and response capabilities |
Tools & Systems
- MITRE ATT&CK Navigator: Web-based visualization tool for creating and overlaying ATT&CK technique layers
- MITRE Caldera: Automated adversary emulation platform for testing detection coverage at scale
- Atomic Red Team: Open-source library of ATT&CK technique tests for security control validation
- CTID ATT&CK Workbench: MITRE tool for customizing ATT&CK knowledge base with organizational context
- Tidal Cyber: Commercial platform for threat-informed defense planning using ATT&CK framework
Common Scenarios
- Annual Threat Assessment: Map top 5 threat actors to ATT&CK, overlay against detection, produce gap analysis
- Cloud Migration Planning: Model cloud-specific threats (T1078.004, T1537) and plan detection coverage
- M&A Security Assessment: Threat model the acquired company's environment against relevant threat actors
- Budget Justification: Use gap analysis to demonstrate detection blind spots requiring tool investment
- Purple Team Planning: Select adversary emulation scenarios based on highest-priority gaps from threat model
Output Format
THREAT MODEL ASSESSMENT — Financial Services Division
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Date: 2024-03-15
Threat Actors: FIN7, APT38, Lazarus Group
Techniques Total: 87 unique techniques across all actors
DETECTION COVERAGE:
Covered: 56/87 (64%)
Gaps: 31/87 (36%)
Tactic Coverage Breakdown:
Initial Access: 78% ████████░░
Execution: 82% █████████░
Persistence: 71% ████████░░
Priv Escalation: 65% ███████░░░
Defense Evasion: 52% ██████░░░░ <-- Priority gap
Credential Access: 58% ██████░░░░ <-- Priority gap
Discovery: 45% █████░░░░░
Lateral Movement: 61% ███████░░░
Collection: 50% ██████░░░░
Exfiltration: 55% ██████░░░░
C2: 67% ███████░░░
TOP PRIORITY GAPS (30-day remediation):
1. T1055 Process Injection — used by all 3 actors, 0 detections
2. T1003.006 DCSync — used by FIN7 and Lazarus, 0 detections
3. T1070.004 File Deletion — evidence destruction, 0 detections
INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATION:
Closing top 10 gaps requires: 2 detection engineer FTEs, 60 days
Expected coverage improvement: 64% -> 76%
04 同仓库更多 Skills
verifying-build-provenance-with-slsa-sigstore
Verifies artifact signatures and SLSA provenance using Sigstore's cosign (verify, verify-attestation, verify-blob-attestation) and slsa-verifier (verify-artifact), enforcing keyless OIDC builder identity and source repo against SLSA Build levels. Use in CI/CD before deploying artifacts, when consuming third-party attestations, establishing a SLSA Build L3 pipeline, or confirming provenance during incident response or admission control.
validating-tpm-measured-boot-attestation
Verifies TPM 2.0 measured-boot integrity and remote attestation with tpm2-tools -- reading PCRs (tpm2_pcrread), replaying the boot event log, generating and checking signed quotes (tpm2_quote/tpm2_checkquote), and sealing secrets to a PCR policy. Use to confirm a system booted trusted firmware/kernel for Zero Trust device posture, detect boot-chain tampering via PCR drift, or build a golden-value baseline for fleet attestation.
validating-backup-integrity-for-recovery
Validates backup integrity through cryptographic hash verification, automated restore testing, corruption detection, and recoverability checks to confirm backups are reliable for disaster recovery and ransomware response. Use before relying on backups for recovery, when building post-backup validation pipelines, auditing backup infrastructure for compliance, or checking immutable/air-gapped backups for silent corruption or tampering.
triaging-windows-with-kape
Runs KAPE (Kroll Artifact Parser and Extractor) to collect targeted forensic artifacts (registry hives, $MFT, event logs, prefetch, browser data) via Targets and parse them with Modules wrapping Eric Zimmerman's EZ Tools (PECmd, MFTECmd, RECmd). Use during early incident containment/triage when full disk imaging is impractical but a defensible, parseable Windows artifact set is needed quickly, including at-scale remote collection.
triaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework
Triages and prioritizes vulnerabilities with CISA's Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization (SSVC) decision tree, weighing exploitation status (via the CISA KEV catalog and FIRST EPSS API), technical impact, automatability, and mission prevalence to output Track/Track*/Attend/Act decisions. Use when prioritizing vulnerability scan results (OpenVAS, Nessus, Qualys) for remediation planning beyond raw CVSS scores.
triaging-security-incident
Performs initial triage of security incidents using the NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks, classifying incident type, assigning priority by business impact, and routing to the appropriate response team. Use when a SIEM/EDR alert needs human classification, concurrent alerts must be prioritized, or a user report or threat-intel IOC match requires initial incident categorization.