ReZaAdineH

Introduction

Threat hunting is the process of proactively searching for threats or suspicious activities that may have evaded existing security measures. Threat intelligence, on the other hand, refers to the information gathered and analyzed to identify potential threats to an organization. The combination of these two techniques can help organizations enhance their security posture and reduce the likelihood of successful cyberattacks. In this paper, we will explore how threat intelligence and the pyramid of pain can be used for practical threat hunting.

Threat Intelligence

Threat intelligence is a key component of threat hunting. It involves gathering, analyzing, and disseminating information about potential threats to an organization’s assets. Threat intelligence can be classified into three categories:

1. Strategic Intelligence: This type of intelligence is high-level and provides a broad understanding of the threat landscape. It includes information about the capabilities, intentions, and motivations of threat actors, as well as the types of attacks they are likely to carry out.
2. Operational Intelligence: Operational intelligence is more tactical and provides information about the tools, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) used by threat actors. This type of intelligence is used to identify specific indicators of compromise (IOCs) that can be used to detect and respond to attacks.
3. Technical Intelligence: Technical intelligence provides detailed information about the specific vulnerabilities, exploits, and malware used by threat actors. This type of intelligence is used to identify specific artifacts and IOCs that can be used to detect and respond to attacks.

The Pyramid of Pain

The pyramid of pain is a framework that helps organizations prioritize their response to cyber threats. The pyramid is divided into four levels, each representing a different level of difficulty for an attacker to achieve their objective. The levels are:

1. Indicator of Compromise (IoC): This level includes simple IOCs such as IP addresses, domain names, and hashes of known malware. These IOCs are relatively easy to detect and block, but they can also be easily changed by attackers.
2. TTPs: The second level includes the TTPs used by threat actors. These include specific techniques and procedures that attackers use to compromise systems or steal data. TTPs are harder to detect than IOCs, but they can also be changed by attackers.
3. Tooling: The third level includes the specific tools and malware used by threat actors. These are more difficult to detect than TTPs and IOCs, but they can also be changed or customized by attackers.
4. Infrastructure: The fourth level includes the infrastructure used by threat actors, such as command and control servers, botnets, and other networks. Infrastructure is the most difficult level to detect and disrupt, but it is also the most critical to the success of an attack.

Using Threat Intelligence and the Pyramid of Pain for Practical Threat Hunting

To use threat intelligence and the pyramid of pain for practical threat hunting, organizations need to follow a systematic process. The process can be divided into the following steps:

1. Gather Threat Intelligence: The first step is to gather threat intelligence from various sources, such as open-source intelligence (OSINT), commercial threat feeds, and internal security logs. This intelligence should be categorized according to the three types of threat intelligence mentioned above.
2. Analyze Threat Intelligence: The next step is to analyze the threat intelligence to identify potential threats and determine their level on the pyramid of pain. This analysis should also help identify the TTPs and tools used by threat actors.
3. Prioritize Threats: Based on the analysis of threat intelligence, organizations should prioritize their response to potential threats based on the level of the pyramid of pain. Threats at the IoC level should be addressed first, followed by TTPs, tooling, and infrastructure.
4. Develop Countermeasures: Once the threats have been prioritized, organizations should develop counter measures to address each level of the pyramid of pain. Countermeasures should be designed to disrupt the attacker’s ability to achieve their objectives.

For example, to address threats at the IoC level, organizations can implement measures such as blacklisting IP addresses, domains, and hashes associated with known malware. These measures can be automated and integrated into security tools to detect and block attacks.

To address threats at the TTP level, organizations can develop countermeasures that focus on detecting and disrupting the attacker’s specific techniques and procedures. This can involve monitoring system logs for anomalous activity, deploying endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools, or implementing user behavior analytics (UBA) to identify suspicious behavior.

To address threats at the tooling level, organizations can develop countermeasures that focus on detecting and disrupting the specific tools and malware used by the attacker. This can involve deploying advanced threat detection tools such as sandboxes, honeypots, and malware analysis tools.

To address threats at the infrastructure level, organizations can develop countermeasures that focus on disrupting the attacker’s command and control (C2) servers, botnets, and other networks. This can involve blocking C2 traffic, disrupting botnet communication, and conducting forensic analysis to identify the attacker’s infrastructure.

Conclusion

Threat hunting is a critical component of any organization’s cybersecurity strategy. By combining threat intelligence and the pyramid of pain, organizations can enhance their ability to proactively detect and respond to potential threats. By systematically analyzing threat intelligence and prioritizing threats based on the pyramid of pain, organizations can develop countermeasures that are tailored to the specific level of the threat. This approach can help organizations minimize the impact of cyber attacks and reduce the likelihood of successful compromise.