Threat-Driven Cyber Defense

Organizations are struggling to move towards proactive cybersecurity and prevent the next breach due to increasingly complex cyber attacks, lack of adequate cyber talent, and changing IT environments

 

Traditional approaches to capability gap identification and program planning fall short for several reasons...

Traditional Maturity Based Approach

(e.g. NIST CSF)

What capabilities should a program generally have in place?

Benefits

  • Focuses on cybersecurity capabilities achieving compliance

  • Follows a top-down, strategic methodology for managing cyber risks and requirements

  • Measures effectiveness of individual services within the cybersecurity program

Challenges

  • Does not prioritize which capabilities to mature the cybersecurity program

  • High-level requirements that do not account for environment and adversary variables

  • Does not measure controls effectiveness at the asset, system, or application level

 

Threat Centric Approach

Logo-05 - Copy.png

How should we implement our defenses and which should we prioritize?

  • Provides actionable outputs, relevant to your organization from collaborative sessions to rapidly uplift enterprise resiliency

  • Builds on the traditional approach by incorporating a bottom-up, tactical insights and ties together NIST and MITRE for holistic, right sized planning

  • Measures control effectiveness against modularized threat characteristics  

Tactical Approach

(e.g. MITRE ATT&CK)

What approaches do adversaries take and how will they attempt to breach our systems?

Benefits

  • Thorough detail on adversary tactics and defensive measures required for mitigation

  • Adversary and malware characteristics linked to specific indicators

  • Widespread usage in vendor tools, which easily ties into metrics and reporting at the asset, system and application level

Challenges

  • While the tactics and techniques can be narrowed by industry, heavy customization required to derive value

  • Does not account for people and governance controls

  • Does not account for the iterative attack paths an attacker may make

Our threat-driven cybersecurity solution digests threats into manageable components and iteratively targets specific cybersecurity threats based on organizational profile, driving participation and actionable insights with these components: 

1. Threat Landscape Development

Conduct review of current threats based on industry and historical incidents aligned to MITRE ATT&CK

  • Identify cyber priorties based on adversary behavior and busines ojbectives (targets)  

  • Create a common language to inform the business and prioritize cyber defenses

2. Threat Repository Build

Focus the threat lens through modular components applicable to new and emerging threats

  • Align threat attributes to adversary tactics 

  • Align advesary tactics to the Unified Kill Chain and MITRE ATT&CK to identify key threat characteristics and defenses against common attacks

3. Rehearsal and Planning Threat Response (RAPTR) Sessions

Establish collective, interactive scenario-driven sessions to identify control and process refactoring required

  • Select and pressure test relevant threat tactics 

  • Refine threat planning templates and process based on lessons learned RAPTR sessions 

  • Enhance controls and operating model efficacy based on threat scenarios

4. Prioritized Defense Stories

Provide a threat overview and organizational applicability based on RAPTR session outputs

  • dentify and validate protective, detective, and response controls 

  • Develop a deficiency burndown chart to help prioritize cyber component maturity targets 

  • Determine automation opportunities to improve inefficient processes

TalonX is developing a SaaS cybersecurity product, currently in stealth.  If you are interested in learning more or joining the team, contact us here: