Agent skill
implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping
Implement MITRE ATT&CK coverage mapping to identify detection gaps, prioritize rule development, and measure SOC detection maturity against adversary techniques.
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills/tree/main/skills/implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping
SKILL.md
Implementing MITRE ATT&CK Coverage Mapping
Overview
MITRE ATT&CK coverage mapping gives SOC teams a structured, adversary-centric lens to evaluate detection capabilities. Enterprise SIEMs on average have detection coverage for only 21% of ATT&CK techniques (2025 CardinalOps report), with 13% of existing rules being non-functional due to misconfigured data sources. Systematic coverage mapping identifies gaps, prioritizes rule development, and tracks detection maturity over time. ATT&CK v18.1 (December 2025) is the latest version.
When to Use
- When deploying or configuring implementing mitre attack coverage mapping capabilities in your environment
- When establishing security controls aligned to compliance requirements
- When building or improving security architecture for this domain
- When conducting security assessments that require this implementation
Prerequisites
- Access to MITRE ATT&CK Navigator (https://mitre-attack.github.io/attack-navigator/)
- Inventory of all active SIEM detection rules
- MITRE ATT&CK technique mapping for each detection rule
- Data source inventory (which log sources are ingested)
- Understanding of adversary threat profiles relevant to your industry
Coverage Mapping Process
Step 1: Export Current Detection Rules
# Splunk ES - Export all active correlation searches with MITRE mappings
| rest /services/saved/searches
| search disabled=0 action.correlationsearch.enabled=1
| table title, search, action.notable.param.security_domain,
action.notable.param.severity, action.correlationsearch.annotations
| eval mitre_techniques=mvfilter(match('action.correlationsearch.annotations', "mitre_attack"))
// Microsoft Sentinel - Export analytics rules with MITRE mapping
SecurityAlert
| summarize count() by AlertName, ProductName
| join kind=inner (
resources
| where type == "microsoft.securityinsights/alertrules"
| extend tactics = properties.tactics
) on $left.AlertName == $right.name
Step 2: Build the Coverage Matrix
ATT&CK Navigator Layer Format
{
"name": "SOC Detection Coverage - 2025",
"versions": {
"attack": "16",
"navigator": "5.1",
"layer": "4.5"
},
"domain": "enterprise-attack",
"description": "Current detection coverage mapping",
"techniques": [
{
"techniqueID": "T1110",
"tactic": "credential-access",
"color": "#00ff00",
"comment": "2 active rules - Brute Force detection via EventCode 4625",
"score": 75,
"metadata": [
{"name": "rule_count", "value": "2"},
{"name": "data_sources", "value": "Windows Security Log, Linux Auth"},
{"name": "last_validated", "value": "2025-01-15"}
]
},
{
"techniqueID": "T1059.001",
"tactic": "execution",
"color": "#00ff00",
"comment": "3 rules - PowerShell Script Block Logging",
"score": 85
},
{
"techniqueID": "T1055",
"tactic": "defense-evasion",
"color": "#ff0000",
"comment": "NO DETECTION - Requires Sysmon EventCode 8/10",
"score": 0
}
],
"gradient": {
"colors": ["#ff0000", "#ffff00", "#00ff00"],
"minValue": 0,
"maxValue": 100
}
}
Step 3: Score Each Technique
| Score | Color | Meaning | Criteria |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Red | No Detection | No rules, missing data sources |
| 25 | Orange | Minimal | Rule exists but not validated/tested |
| 50 | Yellow | Partial | Rule works but limited coverage |
| 75 | Light Green | Good | Validated rule with good data sources |
| 100 | Green | Excellent | Multiple validated rules, tested with emulation |
Scoring Criteria Detail
Score = Data_Source_Score (0-25) + Rule_Quality_Score (0-25) +
Validation_Score (0-25) + Enrichment_Score (0-25)
Data_Source_Score:
25: All required data sources ingested and parsed
15: Primary data source available
5: Partial data source coverage
0: Required data sources not available
Rule_Quality_Score:
25: Rule uses CIM-compliant queries with proper thresholds
15: Rule works but may generate false positives
5: Basic rule with no tuning
0: No detection rule
Validation_Score:
25: Validated with adversary emulation (Atomic Red Team)
15: Tested with synthetic data
5: Logic reviewed but not tested
0: Not validated
Enrichment_Score:
25: Context-rich with asset, identity, and TI enrichment
15: Basic enrichment (asset lookup)
5: No enrichment
0: N/A (no rule)
Step 4: Identify Priority Gaps
Gap Prioritization Framework
Priority = Technique_Prevalence x Impact x Feasibility
Technique_Prevalence (0-10):
- Based on MITRE Top Techniques report
- Frequency in your industry's threat landscape
- Observed in recent incidents/breaches
Impact (0-10):
- Damage potential if technique succeeds
- Difficulty of recovery
- Data sensitivity at risk
Feasibility (0-10):
- Data source availability
- Rule complexity
- Engineering effort required
Top Priority Techniques to Cover (2025)
| Technique | ID | Prevalence | Typical Gap Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Command and Scripting Interpreter | T1059 | Very High | Requires script block logging |
| Phishing | T1566 | Very High | Email gateway integration |
| Valid Accounts | T1078 | High | Baseline behavior needed |
| Process Injection | T1055 | High | Requires Sysmon or EDR |
| Lateral Movement (RDP/SMB) | T1021 | High | Network segmentation visibility |
| Scheduled Task/Job | T1053 | High | Event log collection |
| Data Encrypted for Impact | T1486 | High | File system monitoring |
| Ingress Tool Transfer | T1105 | Medium | Network traffic analysis |
Step 5: Build Detection Roadmap
Quarter 1: Close Critical Gaps (Score 0, High Prevalence)
Week 1-2: Enable missing data sources
Week 3-4: Build and test rules for top 5 gap techniques
Week 5-8: Validate with adversary emulation
Week 9-12: Tune and operationalize
Quarter 2: Improve Partial Coverage (Score 25-50)
- Upgrade existing rules with enrichment
- Add secondary detection methods
- Validate with purple team exercises
Quarter 3: Mature Good Coverage (Score 50-75)
- Add behavioral analytics
- Implement detection-as-code pipeline
- Cross-technique correlation rules
Quarter 4: Excellence (Score 75-100)
- Continuous testing with BAS tools
- Automated coverage regression testing
- Red team validation
Automated Coverage Assessment
Data Source to Technique Mapping
# Map available data sources to detectable techniques
DATA_SOURCE_TECHNIQUE_MAP = {
"Windows Security Event Log": [
"T1110", "T1078", "T1053.005", "T1098", "T1136",
"T1070.001", "T1021.001", "T1543.003"
],
"Sysmon": [
"T1055", "T1059", "T1003", "T1547.001", "T1036",
"T1218", "T1105", "T1071"
],
"Network Traffic (Firewall/IDS)": [
"T1071", "T1048", "T1105", "T1572", "T1090",
"T1571", "T1573"
],
"DNS Logs": [
"T1071.004", "T1568", "T1583.001", "T1048.003"
],
"Email Gateway": [
"T1566.001", "T1566.002", "T1534"
],
"Cloud Audit Logs": [
"T1078.004", "T1537", "T1530", "T1580",
"T1087.004", "T1098.001"
],
}
Reporting Dashboard Queries
Coverage Summary by Tactic
| inputlookup mitre_coverage_lookup
| stats avg(score) as avg_score count(eval(score=0)) as no_coverage
count(eval(score>0 AND score<50)) as partial
count(eval(score>=50 AND score<75)) as good
count(eval(score>=75)) as excellent
count as total
by tactic
| eval coverage_pct=round((total - no_coverage) / total * 100, 1)
| sort -coverage_pct
References
Recommended Agent Skills
Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.
mapping-mitre-attack-techniques
Maps observed adversary behaviors, security alerts, and detection rules to MITRE ATT&CK techniques and sub-techniques to quantify detection coverage and guide control prioritization. Use when building an ATT&CK-based coverage heatmap, tagging SIEM alerts with technique IDs, aligning security controls to adversary playbooks, or reporting threat exposure to executives. Activates for requests involving ATT&CK Navigator, Sigma rules, MITRE D3FEND, or coverage gap analysis.
hunting-for-spearphishing-indicators
Hunt for spearphishing campaign indicators across email logs, endpoint telemetry, and network data to detect targeted email attacks.
analyzing-malicious-url-with-urlscan
URLScan.io is a free service for scanning and analyzing suspicious URLs. It captures screenshots, DOM content, HTTP transactions, JavaScript behavior, and network connections of web pages in an isolat
implementing-zero-standing-privilege-with-cyberark
Deploy CyberArk Secure Cloud Access to eliminate standing privileges in hybrid and multi-cloud environments using just-in-time access with time, entitlement, and approval controls.
implementing-pam-for-database-access
Deploy privileged access management for database systems including Oracle, SQL Server, PostgreSQL, and MySQL. Covers session proxy configuration, credential vaulting, query auditing, dynamic credentia
detecting-t1003-credential-dumping-with-edr
Detect OS credential dumping techniques targeting LSASS memory, SAM database, NTDS.dit, and cached credentials using EDR telemetry, Sysmon process access monitoring, and Windows security event correlation.
Didn't find tool you were looking for?