What It Does
Cut outbound reachability for a defined scope to stop exfiltration and command channels while analysis continues.
Observable indicator. Exfiltration stops without severing the whole estate.
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 maneuverM8 Isolation / RetrogradeGive ground deliberately to preserve the force. Degrade gracefully; never fail open.
- Terrain layerT3 NetworksThe corridors. Key terrain: TIC 3.0 access points, segment boundaries, cloud VPC peering.
- Position in the form7 of 17M8 carries 17 cataloged techniques; this is the 7th 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 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-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results depend into named, owned, monitored controls, so that the assurance KT-4 provides cannot be silently withdrawn.
- TA-4 Pre-authorized ResponseTempo and Temporal Advantage — To remove authority latency from the decision loop, so that the segment most programs cannot shorten with tooling is shortened by governance.
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-FRIDL Forward Resolution IP DenylistingIsolate tactic
- D3-RRID Reverse Resolution IP DenylistingIsolate tactic
- D3-OTF Outbound Traffic FilteringIsolate 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 30 that share at least one control.
- 1 shared controlM1.06 Credential Exposure MonitoringM1 Screen / Guard · T1 Identity
- TA-4
- 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