red-team-tactics
Red team tactics principles based on MITRE ATT&CK. Attack phases, detection evasion, reporting.
- License 许可
- MIT
- 最近更新
- 2026-11-14
- Stars
- ★ 3.3w
- Forks
- 3.9k
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- red-team-tactics
- description
- Red team tactics principles based on MITRE ATT&CK. Attack phases, detection evasion, reporting.
- allowed-tools
- Read, Glob, Grep
02 资源文件 1
- 参考文档reference/feature-matrix.md6.9 KB
03 SKILL.md 正文
Red Team Tactics
Adversary simulation principles based on MITRE ATT&CK framework.
1. MITRE ATT&CK Phases
Attack Lifecycle
RECONNAISSANCE → INITIAL ACCESS → EXECUTION → PERSISTENCE
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
PRIVILEGE ESC → DEFENSE EVASION → CRED ACCESS → DISCOVERY
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
LATERAL MOVEMENT → COLLECTION → C2 → EXFILTRATION → IMPACT
Phase Objectives
| Phase | Objective |
|---|---|
| Recon | Map attack surface |
| Initial Access | Get first foothold |
| Execution | Run code on target |
| Persistence | Survive reboots |
| Privilege Escalation | Get admin/root |
| Defense Evasion | Avoid detection |
| Credential Access | Harvest credentials |
| Discovery | Map internal network |
| Lateral Movement | Spread to other systems |
| Collection | Gather target data |
| C2 | Maintain command channel |
| Exfiltration | Extract data |
2. Reconnaissance Principles
Passive vs Active
| Type | Trade-off |
|---|---|
| Passive | No target contact, limited info |
| Active | Direct contact, more detection risk |
Information Targets
| Category | Value |
|---|---|
| Technology stack | Attack vector selection |
| Employee info | Social engineering |
| Network ranges | Scanning scope |
| Third parties | Supply chain attack |
3. Initial Access Vectors
Selection Criteria
| Vector | When to Use |
|---|---|
| Phishing | Human target, email access |
| Public exploits | Vulnerable services exposed |
| Valid credentials | Leaked or cracked |
| Supply chain | Third-party access |
4. Privilege Escalation Principles
Windows Targets
| Check | Opportunity |
|---|---|
| Unquoted service paths | Write to path |
| Weak service permissions | Modify service |
| Token privileges | Abuse SeDebug, etc. |
| Stored credentials | Harvest |
Linux Targets
| Check | Opportunity |
|---|---|
| SUID binaries | Execute as owner |
| Sudo misconfiguration | Command execution |
| Kernel vulnerabilities | Kernel exploits |
| Cron jobs | Writable scripts |
5. Defense Evasion Principles
Key Techniques
| Technique | Purpose |
|---|---|
| LOLBins | Use legitimate tools |
| Obfuscation | Hide malicious code |
| Timestomping | Hide file modifications |
| Log clearing | Remove evidence |
Operational Security
- Work during business hours
- Mimic legitimate traffic patterns
- Use encrypted channels
- Blend with normal behavior
6. Lateral Movement Principles
Credential Types
| Type | Use |
|---|---|
| Password | Standard auth |
| Hash | Pass-the-hash |
| Ticket | Pass-the-ticket |
| Certificate | Certificate auth |
Movement Paths
- Admin shares
- Remote services (RDP, SSH, WinRM)
- Exploitation of internal services
7. Active Directory Attacks
Attack Categories
| Attack | Target |
|---|---|
| Kerberoasting | Service account passwords |
| AS-REP Roasting | Accounts without pre-auth |
| DCSync | Domain credentials |
| Golden Ticket | Persistent domain access |
8. Reporting Principles
Attack Narrative
Document the full attack chain:
- How initial access was gained
- What techniques were used
- What objectives were achieved
- Where detection failed
Detection Gaps
For each successful technique:
- What should have detected it?
- Why didn't detection work?
- How to improve detection
9. Ethical Boundaries
Always
- Stay within scope
- Minimize impact
- Report immediately if real threat found
- Document all actions
Never
- Destroy production data
- Cause denial of service (unless scoped)
- Access beyond proof of concept
- Retain sensitive data
10. Anti-Patterns
| ❌ Don't | ✅ Do |
|---|---|
| Rush to exploitation | Follow methodology |
| Cause damage | Minimize impact |
| Skip reporting | Document everything |
| Ignore scope | Stay within boundaries |
Remember: Red team simulates attackers to improve defenses, not to cause harm.
04 同仓库更多 Skills
wealthville-pool-scoring
Score DeFi liquidity pools before providing liquidity. Returns a 0-100 pool score and an Enter/Hold/Exit/Reduce/Avoid verdict with calibrated confidence for ~68,800 Solana pools and 575 EVM pools, plus a public miss-inclusive track record. Use when asked whether a pool is worth LPing into, which pools look best right now, or how accurate the scores have actually been.
technical-debt-auditor
Scans a codebase and produces a quantified technical debt report with a prioritized remediation plan. Analyzes dead code, TODO/FIXME/HACK markers, dependency staleness, complexity hotspots, code duplication signals, test coverage gaps, unused exports, and outdated patterns. Use this skill when the user asks to audit their codebase for tech debt, wants a health check of their code quality, says things like "where should I focus refactoring", "find code smells", "audit my codebase", "what technical debt do we have", "prioritize cleanup work", or asks about code quality metrics. Also trigger when the user mentions "code rot", "legacy cleanup", "refactoring priorities", or wants to understand the overall health of a project before a major effort. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "technical debt" explicitly — any request to systematically assess code quality and identify improvement priorities belongs here.
readonly-sql-guard
Make an agent's database access provably read-only. Use when an agent runs caller-supplied SQL against a production/ERP/analytics database (a "query" MCP tool, text-to-SQL, an admin console), or when reviewing DB-access code for write/DDL/side-effect/transaction-escape risks. Checks what a statement CALLS, not just its shape.
web-artifacts-builder
Suite of tools for creating elaborate, multi-component claude.ai HTML artifacts using modern frontend web technologies (React, Tailwind CSS, shadcn/ui). Use for complex artifacts requiring state management, routing, or shadcn/ui components - not for simple single-file HTML/JSX artifacts.
webapp-testing
Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.
discernment-nudge
After you give a substantive answer or draft that the user may act on — advice or recommendations, drafted artifacts such as goals, plans, pitches, proposals, or emails, estimates or projections, analysis or interpretation of data, factual claims they may rely on, or a multi-step argument — invoke this skill BEFORE finalizing your reply and then, if it applies, append 2-3 short follow-up questions, each tied to something specific in what you just produced, that help the user check key facts, probe the reasoning or assumptions, and notice missing context. Do this at most once per conversation. Skip it when the user asked a trivial how-to or simple lookup, wants a purely educational explanation, asked you only to format, convert, or assemble a file from content they provided, is writing code they will run, is doing creative writing or casual chat, or already asked you to double-check, cite, or review — the skill file explains these boundaries and the exact output format.