September 18, 2018 By Sidney Pearl 4 min read

From Rome to Mexico City, as my IBM Security colleagues and I have traveled the world teaching cyberthreat hunting, we’ve found a multitude of differing opinions about who is and isn’t a target for cyberattacks.

One attendee at a recent workshop even stated: “My bank isn’t a target for a cyberattack because our country isn’t seen as a major globalized economy.”

The reality, however, is that your organization is always a target. Whether you’re a target of choice or a target of opportunity, it’s not a matter of if you’ll be attacked, but when. There’s even a possibility that attackers are already dwelling within your network and have been for some time.

For example, in 2018, 18 million new malware samples were captured and more than 4,000 ransomware attacks occurred, according to the 2018 Threat Hunting Report. And yet, 52 percent of organizations that suffered a successful cyber-attack in 2017 didn’t make any meaningful structural changes to their security posture in 2018. Some of the reasons companies aren’t investing to protect their most valuable assets include:

  • Lack of education, training and understanding of the rapidly changing network of bad actors and security landscape
  • Overwhelmed by the volume of options and often confusing solutions in the market
  • Unable to transition from a reactive information-driven operations model to more proactive actionable-intelligence
  • Inability to understand actual business risk and costs associated with protection
  • Lack of qualified staff to adequately transform information into intelligence to secure the enterprise
  • False sense of security with their current state
  • Small percentage of advanced threats can have dramatic, negative revenue and brand impact
  • Unable to “connect the dots” across diverse data sets
  • Security market fragmentation and confusion

The sheer number of attacks, changing methods, number of growing community of actors, open market of malicious code, and the lack of internal resources make securing your business assets a challenge. So how does the SOC modernize while dealing with all of these compounding factors of not enough time, money or resources?

Watch the on-demand webinar: Know Your Enemy — Proactive Cyber Threat Intelligence and Threat Hunting

Make the First Move With a Strong Cyberthreat Hunting Team

One of the best ways to get out ahead of malicious actors is with cyberthreat hunting, the act of proactively and aggressively eliminating adversaries as early as possible in the Cyber Kill Chain. The quicker you can locate and track your adversaries’ tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs), the less impact attackers will have on your business.

So what types of skills does a cyberthreat hunting team require?

Security operations center (SOC) analysts define cyberthreat hunting as reactive indicators of compromise (IoCs) that lead to an investigation of an incident. IoCs are typically generated by internal security systems such as security information and event management (SIEM), incident response, intrusion detection systems (IDS) and intrusion prevention systems (IPS), and endpoint management tools.

Military and law enforcement intelligence analysts, however, define cyberthreat hunting as the process of proactively identifying, intercepting, tracking, investigating and eliminating IoCs before they impact national security, critical infrastructure and/or citizens.

The truth is they’re both right. There’s a tectonic shift occurring in the cybersecurity community with the convergence and blurring of lines between SOC and intelligence analysts. The challenge is that SOC analysts are not formally trained in intelligence life cycle analysis, and intelligence analysts are not formally trained in incident analysis and response.

The knowledge gap between these two skill sets is quite significant and has to be closed and integrated to build a fully functioning and productive cyberthreat hunting team. It’s also critical for SOCs to grasp the common denominator in both internal (reactive) and external (proactive) cyberthreats: the human element.

Put Methodology Before Technology to Close the Skills Gap

Security teams should take proactive steps to close the skills gap and mature their SOC. First, start with the basic definition of cyberthreat hunting provided above. Next, develop an understanding of the intelligence life cycle tradecraft and apply it to both security and intelligence operations. Finally, create a priority intelligence requirements (PIR) matrix that asks the logical questions of who, what, where, when, why and how regarding the analysis of global, industry-specific, geographic and cyberthreats applicable to your business.

There’s no magic button or technology that will solve all of your security challenges. Through the integrated elements of people, processes, data and technology applied to the “know your enemy” intelligence methodology, you can fully gain insight into how cybercriminals are seeking to target your organization. Putting methodology before technology will serve you well in defining your adversaries’ TTPs and the methods they might use to target your organization.

In a world where the enemy potentially has access to infinite time, money and resources, it’s absolutely critical for the cybersecurity industry to close the knowledge and skills gaps, truly understand the art and science of cyberthreat hunting, and apply that understanding to proactively stop threats before they become a problem.

Download the full report, “What Is Behind the Rise in Threat Hunting?”

More from Threat Hunting

Hive0051’s large scale malicious operations enabled by synchronized multi-channel DNS fluxing

12 min read - For the last year and a half, IBM X-Force has actively monitored the evolution of Hive0051’s malware capabilities. This Russian threat actor has accelerated its development efforts to support expanding operations since the onset of the Ukraine conflict. Recent analysis identified three key changes to capabilities: an improved multi-channel approach to DNS fluxing, obfuscated multi-stage scripts, and the use of fileless PowerShell variants of the Gamma malware. As of October 2023, IBM X-Force has also observed a significant increase in…

Reflective call stack detections and evasions

6 min read - In a blog published this March, we explored reflective loading through the lens of an offensive security tool developer, highlighting detection and evasion opportunities along the way. This time we are diving into call stack detections and evasions, and how BokuLoader reflectively loads call stack spoofing capabilities into beacon. We created this blog and public release of BokuLoader during Dylan’s summer 2023 internship with IBM X-Force Red. While researching call stack spoofing for our in-house C2, this was one of…

SIEM and SOAR in 2023: Key trends and new changes

4 min read - Security information and event management (SIEM) systems remain a key component of security operations centers (SOCs). Security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR) frameworks, meanwhile, have emerged to fill the gap in these capabilities left by many SIEM systems. But as many companies have begun reaching the limits of SIEM and SOAR systems over the last few years, they have started turning to other solutions such as extended detection and response (XDR). But does this shift spell the end of SIEM…

Topic updates

Get email updates and stay ahead of the latest threats to the security landscape, thought leadership and research.
Subscribe today