All CySA+ v4 labs

Lab 9 of 17 · By Michael Stout

In this lab

Read the steps, then try them in your lab environment.

CYSA+ CS0-004 · DOMAIN I SECURITY OPERATIONS CyberCorps.uk · LAB 9
LAB 9 · THREAT CLASSIFICATION

Profile a threat actor, then rank what you found

Chapter 4 splits threat classification into actors, TTPs, and mapping. This lab uses two free, no-install resources — the MITRE ATT&CK groups catalog and the Pyramid of Pain — to turn a threat group's profile into a ranked list of what's actually worth detecting.

WHY THIS LAB

Not every indicator is worth the same effort

A file hash is trivial for an attacker to change — recompile and it's different. A tactic, technique, or procedure is expensive to change — it often means retraining people or rebuilding tooling. David Bianco's Pyramid of Pain ranks indicator types by exactly that cost. MITRE ATT&CK's group profiles give you real TTPs to rank, instead of made-up ones.

THE PYRAMID, BOTTOM TO TOP

Hash values → IP addresses → domain names → host/network artifacts → tools → TTPs. The higher you detect, the more it costs the attacker to route around you.

BEFORE YOU START

What you'll need

SOFTWARE

Nothing to install — a browser and both sites: attack.mitre.org/groups and sans.org/tools/the-pyramid-of-pain.

FORMAT

Pen and paper, or a blank document to record what you find.

TIME

25–35 minutes.

CyberCorps.uk · Lab 9 Page 1 of 2
PROFILE A GROUP · RANK IT · SOURCES CyberCorps.uk · LAB 9
PART 1 · PROFILE A GROUP

Pick one, and read the whole page

  1. Browse the list. Go to attack.mitre.org/groups — over 180 tracked groups, each an “activity cluster” the security community follows under a common name.
  2. Open one that interests you. Any group works for this exercise. Record: its known aliases, three to five techniques it's reported using (with their ATT&CK technique IDs), and any named software or malware associated with it.
  3. Note the sourcing. Each technique links to the public report it came from. Threat intel is only as good as its sourcing — check at least one link.
PART 2 · RANK WHAT YOU FOUND

Sort your notes onto the pyramid

  1. Open the Pyramid of Pain. Go to sans.org/tools/the-pyramid-of-pain and note the six levels from bottom (trivial to change) to top (tough to change).
  2. Sort your group's indicators. A named piece of malware or software is a tool. A described behavior — “uses scheduled tasks for persistence,” “relies on living-off-the-land binaries” — is a TTP, the top of the pyramid.
  3. Answer the real question. If you could only build one detection for this group, would you write it against a tool, or against the technique? Which one survives the group changing its toolkit next month?
ATTRIBUTION IS A CONFIDENCE LEVEL, NOT A FACT

Group names, aliases, and “who's behind this” attribution are analyst judgment calls, not certainties — different vendors sometimes name the same activity differently, or disagree on attribution entirely. Chapter 4's own material on confidence levels applies directly here.

Sources. MITRE ATT&CK, Groups, attack.mitre.org/groups. SANS Institute, The Pyramid of Pain (David Bianco), sans.org/tools/the-pyramid-of-pain.

CyberCorps.uk · Lab 9 Page 2 of 2

Connect this lab to your learning