Generally, security analysts utilize an active information security approach and strategy called “threat hunting.” It involves repeatedly combing through logs from your network, cloud, and endpoint systems to find risks, including advanced persistent threats (APTs) that are eluding your current security system; threat actor tactics, methods, and procedures (TTPs); and indicators of compromise (IoCs). Well, that was a lot. So, let’s break it down.<\/p>
In this article, we will go over all you should know about threat hunting, especially how it works.<\/p>
Threat hunting is a proactive approach to internet security wherein threat hunters actively look for hidden security hazards within a company’s network. Cyber hunting actively looks for dangers that may have eluded your network’s automated defensive mechanisms but were previously undetected, unknown, or unremediated. This contrasts with passive cyber security hunting techniques like mechanical threat detection systems.<\/p>
Threat-hunting consists of:<\/p>
Because sophisticated threats can evade automated cybersecurity, threat hunting is crucial. You still need to be concerned about the remaining 20% of threats, even if automated security tools and tier 1 and 2 security operations center (SOC) analysts should be able to handle about 80% of them. It is probable that among the other 20% of threats, sophisticated ones are capable of causing considerable harm. If they have enough time and resources, they can compromise any network and stay undetected for an average of 280 days. Effective threat hunting helps limit the harm that attackers might cause by shortening the time between intrusion and discovery.<\/p>
Before being discovered, attackers may loiter for weeks or even months. They calmly wait to steal data and find enough private information or login credentials to grant them additional access, which creates the conditions for a significant data breach. How much harm are possible dangers capable of causing? According to the Cost of a Data Breach report, the average cost of a data breach to a corporation is close to USD 4 million. Furthermore, a breach’s negative impacts may not go away for years. An organization may incur more significant costs the longer the interval between a system failure and the deployment of a response.<\/p>
Three typical methods for threat hunting are as follows:<\/p>
The systematic search for specific risks or IoCs based on predetermined standards or intelligence is known as “structured hunting.” Such questions as “Do we use X software with an announced vulnerability and exploit?.” or “Are there any signs of a specific malware strain within our network?” or “Is there any evidence of unauthorized access to sensitive data?” are typical starters for this approach when addressing a potential threat.<\/p>
Threat hunters employ threat intelligence, log data, and other pertinent sources to look for patterns of activity or abnormalities in entity behavior that could point to the existence of a threat to find the answers to these questions. This procedure could include manual data analysis and correlation, as well as automated tools and queries.<\/p>
Exploratory or unstructured hunting is a more flexible method of pursuing threats that don’t rely on predetermined standards or theories. Instead, threat hunters look for possible dangers or weaknesses in an organization’s network or systems using their knowledge and instincts. They frequently concentrate on regions that are considered high-risk or have a track record of security events. The threat hunter should be aware of the risk register and the highest-value entities on the network to concentrate their efforts, regardless of whether the “crown jewels” of the organization are data like intellectual property, customer information, financial records, or personal healthcare information, or just the availability of assets and ability to perform transactions. <\/p>
This risk-based strategy may use various data sources, including network logs, endpoint data, threat intelligence, and innovative methods and technologies to find trends, anomalies, or other IoCs. Since unstructured hunting enables threat hunters to think creatively and search for indications of malicious activity that might not meet typical IoCs or threat profiles, it is beneficial for finding new or emerging threats.<\/p>
A tailored approach to threat hunting known as “situational” or “entity-driven hunting” concentrates on particular occurrences, entities, or circumstances that could pose a higher risk to an organization’s security. High-profile occasions like product debuts, mergers and acquisitions, and security issues may fall under this category. Such occasions include VIP laptops or tablets, high-value assets, and third-party vendors accessing the network through their credentials or service accounts.<\/p>
Since both incoming and departing employees are possible targets for adversarial conduct or information leaks, some threat-hunting teams collaborate with their HR department to monitor these individuals. Threat hunters start their hunt around these occurrences and may start with limited information initially, such as a list of new credentials or information about departing employees.<\/p>
Threat hunters employ this situational method to find potential threats or vulnerabilities related to the scenario by utilizing threat intelligence, other pertinent data, and contextual information about the network’s entities. This could entail working with IT, legal, or business teams, among other stakeholders inside the company, and utilizing both structured and unstructured hunting tactics.<\/p>
Cyberattacks and data breaches cost companies millions of dollars annually. Your company can identify these hazards more effectively with the following advice:<\/p>
Knowing the organization’s regular operating activities is essential for threat hunters to sort through unusual activity and identify the real risks. The threat-hunting team works with essential individuals in IT and outside of it to achieve this by obtaining insightful and valuable data. They can then determine what constitutes strange but normal behavior and what poses a threat. A system like UEBA, which can display the typical operating parameters for an area, its users, and its machines, can be used to automate this procedure.<\/p>
Threat hunters employ this military tactic in cyber warfare. OODA represents:<\/p>
An adequate number of the following should be on a threat-hunting team:<\/p>
To overcome preventive defenses, adversaries of today automate their strategies, methods, and procedures; therefore, automating manual tasks will help enterprise security teams stay ahead of threats. Automation improves cyber threat hunting procedures and better uses manpower and resources for SOCs. These consist of:<\/p>
Cyber threat hunting investigations require gathering a large amount of data from various sources in various categories. It takes many hours to manually filter this data and distinguish reliable information from incomplete information. Automation can increase the security of SOCs’ necessary resources and drastically reduce the time needed for collection.<\/p>
Even the most seasoned and fully staffed SOC might become overwhelmed by the continual threat alerts and warnings. By rapidly classifying threats as high, medium, or low risk, automation can reduce the noise associated with threats and free up security staff time to focus on those that genuinely require immediate attention or more investigation.<\/p>
After discovering a threat, all company networks, endpoints, and cloud infrastructure must be protected.<\/p>
Automated reactions can thwart more minor, more common attacks. Examples include automatically restoring data compromised in an attack using backup information, deleting malicious files after a compromised endpoint has been isolated, and so on. You should never expect machines to be strategic or ethical. Refrain from assuming that people can efficiently search through massive amounts of data at scale or carry out intricate pattern matching.<\/p>
Successful and economical cyber threat-hunting initiatives allocate staff and provide analysts more time to concentrate on their hunting. To conclude more quickly and accurately, threat hunting involves human engagement and input. Core competencies for a cyber threat hunter include innovative and intuitive thinking, a firm grasp of the IT infrastructure, and knowledge of the threat landscape. Humans reduce tedious, unnecessary, and sometimes mistake-prone manual errors, allowing faster, more accurate resolution.<\/p>
For each hunt team, an organization must select the best organizational model. Models depend on a business’s size and financial resources and the availability of analysts with a wide range of expertise. According to SANS, threat hunting requires a highly developed company with a defendable network architecture, sophisticated incident response capabilities, and a security operations team and monitoring.<\/p>
Many businesses employ endpoint security solutions for detection, response, investigations, and security monitoring and administration, including tools that threat hunters frequently use. These remedies may consist of:<\/p>
SIEM and analytical tools for statistical intelligence, such as industry threat data banks, SAS programs, and Threat Intelligence Providers (TIPS). This extends to other things for security data with actionable indicators, including the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center (FSIAC).<\/p>
Lousy IP address or hash, vulnerability management for published hazards, and online reliable publications on dangers. These technologies are typically categorized, requiring the cyber threat hunter to manually weave the value to a conclusive conclusion. For companies needing more human skills, this might be intimidating.<\/p>
By creating a baseline of a system behavior or network traffic, one can make a baseline of permitted and expected occurrences from which abnormalities can be detected. Prioritize high-impact harmful operations by using threat intelligence.<\/p>
Aggressively investigating a network for hidden cyber threats is known as “threat hunting.” Cyber threat hunting searches far and wide for bad actors in your system that have eluded your first line of defense regarding endpoint security.<\/p>
Aggressively investigating a network for hidden cyber threats is known as “threat hunting.” Cyber threat hunting searches far and wide for bad actors in your system that have eluded your first line of defense regarding endpoint security.<\/p>
Threat hunting adopts a proactive strategy, while other monitoring and detection systems, such as SIEM, MDR, and EDR, offer a passive approach. This is the primary distinction between the two types of solutions. They have different functions, yet they are necessary to lower risk and strengthen security posture.<\/p>
While incident response is reactive, threat hunting is proactive. Threat hunting is the process by which analysts proactively look for possible security holes in the network before they become actual attacks. Conversely, incident response seeks to control and lessen the harm that an ongoing cyberattack has produced.<\/p>
Utilizing indications of attack (IoAs) for inquiry is the most proactive method of threat hunting. The first approach uses global detection playbooks to find APT groups and malware strikes. This method frequently conforms to threat models like the MITRE ATT&CKTM model.<\/p>
Threat hunters look for trends, abnormalities, and other indicators of compromise (IoCs) that could point to attackers in the system. They use threat intelligence, other information sources, and their knowledge and experience.<\/p>