What It Does
Hunt against stated hypotheses drawn from the intelligence requirements, not against whatever the queue surfaced.
Observable indicator. Every hunt traces to a priority intelligence requirement.
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 maneuverM7 CounterattackSeize the initiative and evict before the adversary reaches the objective.
- Terrain layerTX Cross-CuttingThe enablers of movement. Key terrain: The telemetry pipeline, the orchestration layer, the rules of engagement.
- Position in the form1 of 17M7 carries 17 cataloged techniques; this is the 1st 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 IISeize InitiativeDetect early, canalize movement, and buy decision time.
- Phase IIIDominateHunt, contain, evict.
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.
- 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.
- CE-3 Fusion and ConfidenceCycle Execution and Assurance — To distinguish assessment from assertion, so that decisions taken on analytic conclusions carry the uncertainty of those conclusions with them.
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-PA Process AnalysisDetect tactic
- D3-UBA User Behavior AnalysisDetect 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 32 that share at least one control.
- 2 shared controlsM1.10 Named-Campaign Indicator WatchM1 Screen / Guard · TX Cross-Cutting
- CE-2
- CE-3
- 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
- 1 shared controlM4.04 DNS Control and SinkholingM4 Obstacle / Canalization · T3 Networks
- CE-2