What It Does
Recompute what the adversary could reach from where they stand, and close the paths ahead of them.
Observable indicator. Reachability from the foothold is reduced during the engagement.
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 layerT3 NetworksThe corridors. Key terrain: TIC 3.0 access points, segment boundaries, cloud VPC peering.
- Position in the form8 of 17M7 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 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.
- KT-4 Adversary Reachability AssessmentKey Terrain and Decisive Points — To produce a computed, repeatable answer to the question a control catalog cannot ask — can they get there from here — and to record the answer as a trend rather than a one-time finding.
- 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results depend into named, owned, monitored controls, so that the assurance KT-4 provides cannot be silently withdrawn.
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-NM Network MappingModel tactic
- D3-LLM Logical Link MappingModel tactic
- D3-ALLM Active Logical Link MappingModel tactic
- D3-AM Access ModelingModel 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 16 that share at least one control.
- 1 shared controlM2.04 Independent Control RedundancyM2 Defense in Depth · TX Cross-Cutting
- KT-5
- 1 shared controlM2.10 Egress Data Loss PreventionM2 Defense in Depth · T5 Data
- KT-5
- 1 shared controlM4.01 MicrosegmentationM4 Obstacle / Canalization · T3 Networks
- KT-5
- 1 shared controlM4.02 East-West Deny by DefaultM4 Obstacle / Canalization · T3 Networks
- KT-5
- 1 shared controlM4.03 Egress Filtering and Allow-ListingM4 Obstacle / Canalization · T3 Networks
- KT-5
- 1 shared controlM4.04 DNS Control and SinkholingM4 Obstacle / Canalization · T3 Networks
- KT-5