ASOM-Fedv6.1Open the explorer
M2.05 · M2 Defense in Depth · 5 of 18

Endpoint Detection and Response Coverage

What It Does

Achieve and prove sensor coverage across the managed fleet, with unmanaged devices treated as a measured gap rather than an assumption.

Observable indicator. Coverage is reconciled to the inventory, not to the console.

Where It Sits

A technique is chosen from inside a form and emplaced on one layer. Both are the catalog’s own declarations; the position is counted in catalog order.

  • Form of maneuverM2 Defense in DepthEnsure no single failure is decisive.
  • Terrain layerT2 DevicesThe entry fords. Key terrain: Mission-staff laptops, contractor devices, the server and VM fleet.
  • Position in the form5 of 18M2 carries 18 cataloged techniques; this is the 5th in catalog order.

Phases It Is Employed In

Employed in one phase of the campaign. A phase named here means at least this technique is live in it — not that the form it belongs to is the main effort.

  • Phase 0ShapeContinuous terrain preparation, zero-trust hardening, partnerships, threat intelligence.

Controls That Assess It

The controls the catalog names against this technique. They are what an assessor would test to establish that it is emplaced and working — the indicator above is what shows it is working, which is a different question.

  • TM-2 Defensive Layer ClassificationTerrain Management — To make posture summable and comparable by layer, and to force an explicit ownership decision for every element.
  • TM-6 Terrain CurrencyTerrain Management — To keep the overlay current against both the clock and the change, so that planning is conducted against ground as it currently is.
  • DV-1 Device Terrain IdentificationDevices Terrain — To make devices positional, so that the crossings into the estate are known and can be defended rather than merely counted.
  • DV-3 Endpoint Sensor Coverage and LivenessDevices Terrain — To know what the estate can actually see, and to detect the loss of that visibility as an event rather than at the next assessment.

In MITRE D3FEND

What this technique is called in MITRE’s countermeasure ontology. The join runs technique-to-technique: D3FEND catalogs countermeasures, and the thing with a countermeasure’s shape here is the technique, not the control.

That a technique reaches a D3FEND countermeasure says the two describe the same defensive act. It does not say the countermeasure is deployed, configured, or working — that is an assessment finding about your estate, not a property of the framework.

Related Techniques

The catalog declares no relation for this entry, and no other entry names it — the inverse is derived here, so an incoming edge would show up even though this one never declared it. The techniques below share its assessment surface, which is the nearest adjacency the data supports.

Assessed Alongside

Not a declared relation: these are the techniques whose assessing controls overlap this one’s, ranked by how much of the two assessment surfaces coincide. Showing 6 of 14 that share at least one control.