What It Does
Deliberately leave the paths you want an adversary to take, and instrument them heavily.
Observable indicator. Observed lateral attempts land in instrumented segments.
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 maneuverM4 Obstacle / CanalizationForce the adversary onto ground you own and watch.
- Terrain layerT3 NetworksThe corridors. Key terrain: TIC 3.0 access points, segment boundaries, cloud VPC peering.
- Position in the form8 of 17M4 carries 17 cataloged techniques; this is the 8th in catalog order.
Phases It Is Employed In
Employed in 2 of the campaign’s six phases. 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 IDeterVisible hardening, a deception grid, and a stated attribution posture.
- Phase IISeize InitiativeDetect early, canalize movement, and buy decision time.
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.
- KT-5 Barrier SufficiencyKey Terrain and Decisive Points — To make the barriers on which negative reachability results depend into named, owned, monitored controls, so that the assurance KT-4 provides cannot be silently withdrawn.
- CE-2 Priority Intelligence RequirementsCycle Execution and Assurance — To direct analytic effort at named questions, so that collection and hunting answer what the accountable authority needs rather than processing what arrives.
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.
- D3-NTA Network Traffic AnalysisDetect tactic
- D3-NI Network IsolationIsolate tactic
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 39 that share at least one control.
- 2 shared controlsM4.04 DNS Control and SinkholingM4 Obstacle / Canalization · T3 Networks
- CE-2
- KT-5
- 2 shared controlsM5.04 Honeypot Services in CorridorsM5 Ambush · T3 Networks
- CE-2
- KT-5
- 1 shared controlM1.04 Perimeter Canary TokensM1 Screen / Guard · T5 Data
- CE-2
- 1 shared controlM1.05 Authentication Geography BaselineM1 Screen / Guard · T1 Identity
- CE-2
- 1 shared controlM1.06 Credential Exposure MonitoringM1 Screen / Guard · T1 Identity
- CE-2
- 1 shared controlM1.07 Partner and Advisory IntakeM1 Screen / Guard · TX Cross-Cutting
- CE-2