What tools and techniques are common to threat detection and response
Several categories of cybersecurity systems can create the technical foundation for enterprise-level threat detection and response, including intrusion detection systems, NDR, EDR, XDR, and MDR. Some or all of these platforms will operate in concert with SIEM, security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR), data lakes, and other solutions that collect and integrate data and alerts within the security stack.
However, security teams that rely solely on technology may be confined to a reactive posture that does not anticipate how adversaries may change their tools and behaviors and does not help to prioritize alerts or contextualize IOCs and TTPs.
Automation through machine learning tools is a necessary component of detection and response. However, security teams, and solution vendors, are far from automating the process; it is therefore critical to put sufficient weight on the human element of the equation. Without the necessary skills, experience, and access to quality threat intelligence, much of the value in ML and automation will be unrealized.
Effective threat detection and response, therefore, also depends on other factors, including:
- Threat intelligence. Threat intelligence refers to any information that helps security teams understand the nature of the cyber threats they face and pivot to a more proactive, data-driven approach to detection and response. It can include IOCs collected from existing security tools and platforms, threat intel feeds with updated information about new vulnerabilities and exploits as well as feeds from open-source traffic analysis platforms, such as Zeek® and Suricata, and knowledge bases such as MITRE ATT&CK Some vendors generate threat intelligence from partnerships with select customers (such as Corelight's Polaris Program).
- Threat modeling. This is a process that helps an organization assess the complexities and potential vulnerabilities of its systems. While threat modeling has applications beyond detection and response, it can be helpful for analysts who must assess the potential risk of compromise within their systems, and help them prioritize alerts. Threat modeling can also support pen testing and other methods of gauging the strength of system elements.
- Threat hunting. Threat hunting is a proactive, human-led process in which security teams use automated, ML-based, and manual tools to uncover evidence of stealthy adversary activity. It assumes adversaries can and will evade intrusion prevention defenses, and that they will continue to develop evasive techniques.
Threat hunting does not focus on known threats. As new evidence of adversary activity is discovered, threat hunters can formulate a hypothesis about the presence of threat and find the compromise by doing the hunt to validate the hypothesis. Threat hunts usually result in creation of rules that automate threat indicator matching. It is an iterative process that depends on automated tools to handle detection of known threats, while strategically using analysts' creativity, knowledge, and limited time to mount informed hunts for new evidence of threats and adversary activity.
Threat hunting can work off a variety of frameworks and models, and hypotheses. Here again, the needs of the business, the tools and expertise native to security teams, and the specific system requirements can all factor into the right approach in any given circumstance. The PEAK Threat Hunting Framework created by the SURGe Security Research Team at Splunk is a notable example of an adaptable approach that can follow hypothesis-driven, baseline, and model-assisted hunting techniques.
(Find out how network evidence generated by the Corelight Open NDR platform helps analysts elevate and refine their threat-hunting approach.)