Proactive Threat Hunting in Modern SOCs - Techniques, Tools, and Real-World Insights

Introduction to Threat Hunting in a SOC

In today’s rapidly evolving cybersecurity landscape, automated detection systems alone are not enough to defend against advanced threats. Attackers constantly refine their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), developing new ways to bypass traditional security measures such as rule-based detection, signatures, and behavior analytics. This leaves organizations vulnerable to sophisticated and stealthy threats that can remain undetected within networks for extended periods.

To address this challenge, modern Security Operations Centers (SOCs) have adopted threat hunting as a proactive approach to detecting hidden threats. Threat hunting goes beyond automated alerts and predefined detection rules, empowering skilled analysts to actively search for suspicious behaviors and anomalies that automated systems may miss. This proactive method enables SOC teams to uncover threats before they cause significant damage, enhancing the organization’s overall security posture.

A SOC serves as the first line of defense in an organization’s security framework, tasked with continuously monitoring and responding to potential security incidents. While SOC teams rely on a range of powerful tools like Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems, Extended Detection and Response (XDR) platforms, and Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools, these automated systems have limitations. They can only detect threats that match predefined patterns or known attack signatures. However, threat actors — especially Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) — employ sophisticated techniques such as lateral movement, credential theft, and fileless malware to evade these defenses.

This is where threat hunting becomes essential. By leveraging data from various sources — endpoints, network traffic, cloud environments, and identity systems — threat hunters analyze patterns and anomalies that could indicate a breach or suspicious activity. Unlike traditional methods that wait for alerts, threat hunting is hypothesis-driven. SOC analysts form educated guesses based on their understanding of the environment and known adversarial techniques, then actively search for evidence of compromise.

Threat hunting is not a replacement for automated detection systems, but rather a complementary strategy that bridges the gap between automation and human intuition. By incorporating threat hunting into the SOC’s operations, organizations gain a deeper layer of defense, enabling them to detect previously unseen attacks, identify indicators of compromise (IOCs), and take action before a threat can escalate.

In summary, threat hunting empowers SOC teams to be proactive in their defense, helping organizations stay ahead of emerging threats and closing security gaps that automated tools might overlook.

Proactive Hunting vs. Reactive Monitoring

One of the key distinctions in Security Operations Center (SOC) workflows is the difference between proactive threat hunting and reactive monitoring. While both approaches are critical for a comprehensive security defense, they serve different purposes and operate on distinct principles.

Reactive monitoring refers to the use of automated systems such as Security Information and Event Management (SIEM), Extended Detection and Response (XDR), and other security tools to continuously scan the environment for known threats. These tools rely on predefined rules, signatures, and behavior analytics to identify and trigger alerts when suspicious activity is detected. Reactive monitoring is essential for detecting threats based on established patterns, enabling SOC teams to respond quickly to known attacks.

However, as attackers become more sophisticated, they often develop tactics that bypass automated detection systems. Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs), for example, use stealth techniques such as lateral movement, credential theft, and fileless malware to blend into legitimate network traffic and evade detection. Automated tools may not flag these activities as threats because they don’t match any predefined rules or signatures, leaving security gaps.

This is where proactive threat hunting comes into play. Unlike reactive monitoring, which waits for alerts to be triggered, proactive threat hunting involves skilled analysts actively searching for hidden threats or anomalies that automated systems may miss. Threat hunters develop hypotheses based on their knowledge of the environment and understanding of adversary tactics, then investigate patterns and behaviors in logs, network traffic, and user activity to uncover signs of compromise.

For example, reactive monitoring might detect a large number of failed login attempts (brute force attacks) and generate an alert for further investigation. However, proactive hunting could identify subtle anomalies, such as a legitimate user account accessing systems it normally doesn’t interact with, suggesting possible lateral movement by an attacker who has stolen credentials. These types of subtle behaviors often go unnoticed by automated tools but can be uncovered through proactive threat hunting.

The Complementary Roles of Hunting and Monitoring

Both reactive monitoring and proactive hunting are critical components of a SOC’s strategy:

• Reactive Monitoring: Provides continuous, automated oversight of the network, triggering alerts for known threats and reducing the need for manual oversight on well-understood attacks.
• Proactive Threat Hunting: Enhances detection by identifying more sophisticated threats, such as zero-day vulnerabilities or APT activity, that automated systems might not catch.

By combining the strengths of automated detection tools and human-driven threat hunting, SOC teams can achieve a more comprehensive security defense. While monitoring catches known threats quickly, hunting focuses on the unknown — threats that lurk beneath the surface and evade traditional detection mechanisms.

In essence, a balanced approach that includes both reactive monitoring and proactive hunting allows SOCs to defend against a broader range of threats, ensuring that the organization is well-protected from both everyday attacks and more advanced, stealthy adversaries.

The Importance of Threat Hunting in Modern SOCs

In today’s increasingly complex threat landscape, threat hunting has become a critical capability for modern Security Operations Centers (SOCs). Attackers continually evolve their tactics, and automated detection systems alone are no longer sufficient to detect all types of threats. Threat hunting fills this gap by proactively searching for hidden threats that may have bypassed traditional detection methods, ensuring that sophisticated attacks are identified and addressed before they cause significant damage.

There are several key reasons why threat hunting is essential in modern SOCs:

1. Overcoming the Limitations of Automated Detection

Automated detection tools like Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems and Extended Detection and Response (XDR) platforms rely on predefined rules and known signatures to identify threats. While these tools are effective in catching many attacks, they are not foolproof. Attackers often develop methods to evade detection, using tactics such as fileless malware, credential theft, or encrypted command-and-control traffic, which don’t match predefined patterns.

Example
The SolarWinds attack in 2020 is a prime example of how sophisticated attackers can evade automated detection. In this case, malicious code was embedded into the Orion software, which was used by numerous organizations, including government agencies. The malware was specifically designed to blend into legitimate network traffic, evading detection for months. It was only after proactive investigations that the attack was uncovered, highlighting the need for human-led threat hunting to detect such sophisticated threats.        

2. Detecting Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs)

APTs are among the most dangerous types of adversaries, known for their ability to remain undetected in networks for extended periods. These attackers often use a combination of tactics, such as exploiting zero-day vulnerabilities, leveraging compromised credentials, or performing lateral movement, all while staying under the radar of automated detection systems.

Hypothetical Scenario
Imagine an APT group targeting a financial institution. They initially compromise a low-privileged account through a phishing email. Because the activity appears legitimate, automated systems might not flag it. However, a skilled threat hunter, suspecting possible lateral movement, could uncover unusual patterns in network traffic between systems that normally don’t communicate. This proactive approach would enable the SOC to detect the presence of an attacker that automated tools missed.        

3. Identifying Hidden Anomalies

Automated systems excel at identifying well-known attack patterns, but they often struggle to detect subtle anomalies that don’t fit predefined rules. These anomalies, however, can be early indicators of compromise. Threat hunters use their expertise and intuition to spot these irregularities, identifying potential threats that might go unnoticed in a purely automated environment.

Example
At a healthcare organization, a threat hunter noticed an unusual spike in outbound traffic from a system late at night—a time when such activity was uncommon. While the automated monitoring systems didn’t raise an alert, the hunter’s investigation revealed that malware was exfiltrating sensitive patient data to an external server. This proactive discovery allowed the SOC to respond before the breach escalated.        

4. Preventing Damage from Long-Dwelling Threats

Many advanced attacks aim to dwell within an organization’s network for long periods, slowly gathering intelligence and positioning themselves for more severe attacks, such as data theft or ransomware. By focusing on inconsistencies in user behavior, system logs, and network traffic, threat hunters can detect these long-dwelling threats before they execute their final objectives.

Example
At a manufacturing firm, a threat hunter identified that a privileged account had logged into several systems that the user typically didn’t access. Although this didn’t trigger an alert from automated systems, the investigation uncovered that an attacker had been slowly escalating privileges over time, positioning themselves for a ransomware attack. The early detection of this long-dwelling threat allowed the SOC to contain the attack before it could inflict damage.        

Incorporating proactive threat hunting into a SOC’s operations not only improves detection capabilities but also strengthens an organization’s overall security posture. By finding hidden threats, detecting APTs, and uncovering subtle anomalies that automated tools miss, threat hunters provide an invaluable layer of defense. This proactive approach allows organizations to stay ahead of attackers, preventing damage before it happens and continuously improving their security measures.

Essential Tools and Skills for Effective Threat Hunting

Effective threat hunting requires more than just powerful tools—it also demands skilled analysts who can leverage those tools to uncover hidden threats. While technology plays a critical role in enabling threat hunters to monitor and analyze data, it is the human intuition, experience, and analytical thinking that make threat hunting truly effective.

In this chapter, we will discuss the essential tools and skill sets required for successful threat hunting in a Security Operations Center (SOC).

Tools for Threat Hunting

Having the right tools at your disposal can significantly enhance the ability of SOC analysts to detect, investigate, and respond to threats. Here are the key tools commonly used in threat hunting:

1. Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)

SIEM tools are a cornerstone of modern SOC operations, aggregating and correlating logs from various systems, applications, and security devices. SIEMs provide centralized visibility across the network and allow analysts to query and analyze event data.

Why SIEM Matters for Threat Hunting

• Centralized log aggregation across endpoints, cloud environments, and applications
• Ability to create custom queries for identifying suspicious patterns
• Useful for correlating events from various data sources to track potential security incidents

Example
Tools like Microsoft Sentinel allow threat hunters to write advanced queries, combining event data from different sources (e.g., network traffic, endpoints) to track abnormal user activity, such as repeated failed logon attempts or suspicious service ticket requests.        

2. Extended Detection and Response (XDR)

XDR solutions provide a unified platform that integrates data from various domains, such as endpoints, identities, cloud environments, and networks. This gives threat hunters broader visibility and helps correlate data across different systems.

Why XDR Matters for Threat Hunting

• Unified visibility into multiple threat vectors (endpoints, network, cloud)
• Enhanced correlation of data to detect more sophisticated attacks
• Integrated endpoint and network protection

Example
Microsoft XDR enables analysts to detect lateral movement across systems by correlating endpoint and network data, helping to uncover more complex attacks, such as privilege escalation attempts or credential theft.        

3. Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

EDR tools provide real-time monitoring and in-depth visibility into activities on endpoints. These tools are crucial for detecting fileless malware, abnormal process behavior, and changes in system configurations.

Why EDR Matters for Threat Hunting

• Real-time visibility into endpoint behavior, such as file executions, privilege escalations, or abnormal processes
• Forensic capabilities for investigating how a threat gained access or what actions were taken

Example
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides detailed information about process execution, file system changes, and network connections. Threat hunters can use this tool to detect anomalies, such as unexpected privilege escalation attempts, which may indicate an attack.        

4. Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)

NTA tools monitor the flow of traffic across the network, identifying patterns or anomalies that indicate potential malicious behavior. NTA is useful for detecting lateral movement, data exfiltration, or communication with command-and-control (C2) servers.

Why NTA Matters for Threat Hunting

• Detects anomalies in traffic patterns, such as unexpected outbound connections
• Identifies lateral movement within the network, even if endpoint security is bypassed
• Useful for spotting covert channels or DNS tunneling

Example
Corelight, an NTA tool built on Zeek, provides insights into network traffic and can flag unusual patterns, such as a sudden spike in DNS requests or unexpected external connections, indicating possible malware communication or data exfiltration.        

5. Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIPs)

TIPs integrate internal data with external threat intelligence, providing valuable context about emerging threats, vulnerabilities, and attack techniques. TIPs help analysts prioritize their threat hunting efforts based on real-world attack trends.

Why TIPs Matter for Threat Hunting

• Enriches internal data with external intelligence, offering insights into active threat campaigns and emerging attack techniques
• Helps build better hypotheses for threat hunting by keeping hunters informed of real-world adversary tactics

Example
SOCRadar integrates real-time threat intelligence with internal telemetry, allowing analysts to hunt for indicators of compromise (IOCs) based on the latest threat actor activity, such as IP addresses associated with known command-and-control servers.        

Skills for Successful Threat Hunting

While tools provide the necessary data and visibility, threat hunting success hinges on the skill and expertise of the analysts. Here are the key skills every threat hunter should possess:

1. Understanding of Attack Frameworks (e.g., MITRE ATT&CK)

Threat hunters need a strong grasp of adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) to anticipate how attackers might operate within a network. The MITRE ATT&CK framework serves as a critical resource for understanding the lifecycle of an attack and helps threat hunters map their findings to specific techniques.

Example Skill Application
A threat hunter notices unusual service ticket requests (Windows Event ID 4769). Using the MITRE ATT&CK framework, the hunter links this behavior to a Pass-the-Ticket attack (T1550), enabling them to focus their investigation on credential theft and lateral movement.        

2. Proficiency in Log Analysis and Querying Tools

Effective threat hunting involves analyzing vast amounts of data, and hunters must be proficient in using query languages and log analysis tools. SIEM and EDR platforms offer advanced querying capabilities to sift through logs and identify patterns of abnormal behavior.

Example Skill Application
A hunter uses Kusto Query Language (KQL) in Microsoft Sentinel to query failed logon attempts (Event ID 4625) followed by successful logons (Event ID 4624), identifying a potential brute force attack followed by successful lateral movement.        

3. Analytical and Critical Thinking

Threat hunting is a highly analytical process, requiring hunters to identify subtle patterns, connect disparate events, and think critically about the possible attack scenarios. Strong problem-solving skills are crucial for forming hypotheses and interpreting results.

Example Skill Application
A threat hunter detects a sudden spike in network traffic during non-business hours. They hypothesize that data exfiltration is occurring and investigate further to uncover a stealthy attack using DNS tunneling to exfiltrate data.        

4. Knowledge of Network, Endpoint, and Cloud Security

Threat hunters must understand how different environments operate—endpoints, networks, cloud services—and how attackers can exploit vulnerabilities in each. This knowledge helps hunters detect cross-environment attacks.

Example Skill Application
After identifying a compromised endpoint through abnormal process behavior, the threat hunter investigates network traffic to track whether the attacker moved laterally to cloud applications, leveraging knowledge of endpoint behavior and cloud security.        

5. Experience in Security Incident Response

Threat hunters need experience in security incident response to understand how their findings will transition into action. This experience ensures that the hunting results are effectively escalated into mitigation steps, such as containment, eradication, and recovery.

Example Skill Application
After identifying a lateral movement attempt, the threat hunter immediately escalates the findings to the SOC security incident response team, triggering the isolation of compromised systems and revocation of suspicious access tokens.        

The Balance Between Tools and Skills

While tools provide the data and visibility required for effective threat hunting, it’s the combination of these tools with the right skills that makes threat hunting successful. Skilled analysts can interpret data, form hypotheses, and adapt to new threats, while tools ensure they have the necessary visibility to track and detect anomalies across an organization’s environment.

In summary, threat hunting is most effective when the right tools are in the hands of skilled analysts, enabling them to uncover hidden threats, detect anomalies, and provide the organization with a proactive defense against sophisticated attacks.

The Threat Hunting Process: A Step-by-Step Approach

Effective threat hunting follows a structured, hypothesis-driven approach that guides security analysts through a methodical investigation. This process allows hunters to focus their efforts on the most likely threats and ensures they gather relevant data to either confirm or disprove their hypotheses.

Below is a step-by-step guide to conducting a successful threat hunt

Step 1: Hypothesis Generation

The foundation of every threat hunt is a well-formed hypothesis. A hypothesis is an educated guess based on observed behaviors, known adversary tactics, or recent intelligence about potential attack vectors. This helps threat hunters focus their investigation and search for specific indicators of compromise (IOCs) or anomalous activity.

How to Form Hypotheses

• Use the MITRE ATT&CK framework to understand adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) and form hypotheses based on how attackers might infiltrate your network.
• Integrate external intelligence from Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIPs) to identify emerging threats or attack vectors relevant to your organization.
• Review past security incidents, failed detection attempts, or suspicious behaviors to form hypotheses on potential undetected threats.

Practical Example
A SOC analyst hypothesizes that attackers may be using compromised credentials to move laterally within the network after a successful phishing attack. The hypothesis could be: “An adversary is attempting to escalate privileges using valid but compromised credentials to access sensitive systems.”        

Step 2: Data Collection and Aggregation

Once a hypothesis is defined, the next step is to gather data from multiple sources to support or disprove the hypothesis. Threat hunters collect telemetry from endpoints, network traffic, identity systems, cloud environments, and other relevant data points to get a comprehensive view of the environment.

Data Sources

• Collect logs and event data from various sources, such as endpoint activity, network traffic, identity services, and applications.
• Gather detailed endpoint activity, including process behavior, file system changes, and system configurations.
• Analyze traffic patterns to detect anomalies like unusual outbound connections, beaconing, or lateral movement.
• Enrich internal telemetry with external threat intelligence data to provide context and insights on observed behaviors.

Practical Example
A threat hunter uses Microsoft Sentinel to pull logs related to failed and successful logons (Event IDs 4625 and 4624), network traffic between sensitive systems, and endpoint process activity. The analyst also incorporates data from SOCRadar to check for indicators of compromise (IOCs) associated with recent campaigns targeting the organization’s industry.        

Step 3: Data Analysis and Investigation

With the data collected, threat hunters begin analyzing it to find patterns, behaviors, or anomalies that support their hypothesis. This phase is where skilled analysts shine, using their expertise to sift through massive amounts of data to spot deviations from normal activity.

Key Analysis Techniques

• Compare current behavior with historical baselines to detect unusual activity (e.g., a user logging in at odd hours or from an unexpected location).
• Connect related events, such as failed logon attempts followed by successful logons from different IP addresses, indicating potential brute force or lateral movement attempts.
• Identify specific patterns in log files, network traffic, or system behavior that match known attack techniques, such as repeated service ticket requests indicating a Pass-the-Ticket attack.

Practical Example
A hunter uses Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to detect unusual process behavior on a system where a privileged account logged in multiple times in a short period from different IP addresses. This indicates possible lateral movement by an attacker who gained access to the credentials.        

Step 4: Threat Detection: Hunting for Patterns and Anomalies

After identifying suspicious activities, the next step is to look for patterns and anomalies that indicate malicious behavior. Threat hunters investigate whether these anomalies correlate with known attack techniques or suggest novel methods being used by adversaries.

Anomaly Detection

• Look for abnormal logon activity, such as logons outside of business hours, from unexpected IP addresses, or involving high-privilege accounts.
• Monitor for unusual data transfers, such as large outbound traffic volumes or connections to external servers that are atypical for the environment.
• Investigate service accounts accessing systems they typically don’t interact with, which could indicate abuse of credentials for lateral movement.

Practical Example
A hunter detects repeated service ticket requests (Event ID 4769) involving a privileged account, which is uncommon for normal network operations. This suggests that attackers may be using Pass-the-Ticket techniques to move laterally and escalate privileges.        

Step 5: Continuous Refinement and Iteration

Threat hunting is an iterative process. As hunters gather insights and evidence, they may refine their hypotheses and adjust their strategies. Continuous refinement improves hunting efficiency and ensures that the SOC remains agile in responding to new or evolving threats.

Actions to Take

• Based on findings, create custom detection rules in the SIEM or XDR to trigger alerts when similar behavior is detected in the future.
• Update hypotheses based on the results of the investigation, and plan future hunts accordingly.
• Use the insights from threat hunting to adjust automated detection systems and reduce false positives or enhance detection for similar attack patterns.

Practical Example
After identifying abnormal service ticket requests during the hunt, the analyst creates a custom alert rule in Microsoft Sentinel to automatically trigger alerts for any future occurrence of this behavior. The next time a similar attack attempt is made, the SOC will be alerted instantly.        

Threat hunting is not a one-time activity. It is a continuous loop of learning, investigation, and improvement. Each hunt provides new insights that improve future hunts, helping the SOC refine detection rules, identify potential gaps in security, and stay ahead of attackers. By continually iterating on their findings, threat hunters ensure that the organization remains resilient against evolving threats.

Deep Dive into Threat Hunting Techniques

Threat hunting is a dynamic process that requires a combination of technical knowledge, investigative skills, and an understanding of adversary behavior. In this chapter, we’ll explore key techniques used by skilled threat hunters to detect and investigate potential threats, emphasizing how these methods are applied in practice.

1. Leveraging the MITRE ATT&CK Framework

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is an invaluable tool for threat hunters, providing a structured knowledge base of adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs). This framework helps hunters map observed behaviors to known attack patterns, guiding their investigation and helping them anticipate what attackers might do next.

How to Use MITRE ATT&CK in Threat Hunting

• Tactics: These represent the goals of the attacker, such as initial access, persistence, or lateral movement.
• Techniques: The specific methods adversaries use to achieve their goals, such as exploiting vulnerabilities or using stolen credentials.
• Procedures: The detailed steps attackers take to implement these techniques.

By mapping suspicious activity to the MITRE ATT&CK framework, threat hunters can focus on the specific tactics and techniques that adversaries are likely to use based on their goals.

Practical Example
If a threat hunter notices unusual logon patterns involving a privileged account, they can map this behavior to the "Lateral Movement" tactic and the "Pass-the-Ticket" technique (T1550). This allows the hunter to focus on detecting how the attacker is using stolen Kerberos tickets to move across systems undetected.        

2. Hypothesis-Driven Hunting

Threat hunting is fundamentally hypothesis-driven, meaning that analysts form educated guesses about potential attacks and then investigate the environment for evidence that either supports or refutes these hypotheses. This method encourages proactive investigation rather than relying solely on alerts.

Formulating Hypotheses

• Hypotheses are often informed by frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK, focusing on likely tactics used by adversaries.
• External threat intelligence can provide insights into emerging attack trends, helping analysts form hypotheses about specific tactics adversaries might use.
• Previous security incidents or suspicious behavior patterns can also serve as the basis for a hypothesis.

Testing Hypotheses

Once a hypothesis is formed, analysts use logs, network data, and endpoint activity to test their theory and uncover signs of compromise.

Practical Example
A hunter forms a hypothesis that attackers may be using a compromised service account to escalate privileges. They then search for patterns such as Event ID 4672 (Special Privileges Assigned) to identify accounts that have received elevated privileges, followed by Event ID 4624 (Successful Logon) to check if these accounts are logging in from unusual locations or systems.        

3. Behavioral Analytics for Anomaly Detection

Adversaries often blend their activities with legitimate traffic, making it difficult for automated systems to detect threats. Threat hunters use behavioral analytics to identify deviations from normal patterns, which may serve as early indicators of compromise.

Baselining Normal Activity

To detect anomalies, hunters first need to understand what “normal” activity looks like within the environment. For example, if a particular user account typically logs in during business hours from a specific IP address, any logons outside these parameters could be flagged as suspicious.

Detecting Anomalies

Hunters use advanced query tools within SIEM or XDR platforms to detect unusual behavior, such as spikes in network traffic, abnormal login times, or users accessing systems they normally don’t interact with.

Practical Example
A threat hunter detects a spike in outbound traffic from a normally quiet system late at night. Investigating further, the hunter finds that this system is connecting to an external server not normally accessed, which could indicate an attacker exfiltrating data. This anomaly didn’t trigger an automated alert, but the hunter’s proactive investigation revealed the threat.        

4. Log Analysis and Event Correlation

Log analysis is one of the core techniques in threat hunting. By analyzing logs from endpoints, network devices, and servers, hunters can identify patterns or clues that point to malicious activity. However, log analysis is most powerful when combined with event correlation, connecting seemingly unrelated events across different systems to uncover hidden threats.

Log Analysis

Threat hunters query logs for suspicious events, such as failed logon attempts, abnormal file access, or unusual process execution.

Event Correlation

Correlating events helps uncover patterns that individual logs might not reveal. For example, a single failed logon attempt may not be suspicious, but correlating multiple failed attempts across different systems with a successful login could point to a brute force or credential stuffing attack.

Practical Example
A hunter uses Microsoft Sentinel to correlate Event ID 4769 (Service Ticket Request) with Event ID 4624 (Logon Success). This correlation helps detect a Pass-the-Ticket attack, where forged Kerberos tickets are being used to impersonate legitimate users and access critical resources across multiple systems.        

5. Threat Intelligence Integration

Incorporating Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIPs) into the hunting process provides threat hunters with real-time insights into ongoing attack campaigns, vulnerabilities, and known adversary tactics. This external intelligence helps prioritize hunts and ensures that hunters are searching for threats based on real-world attack scenarios.

How to Use Threat Intelligence in Hunting

• Enrich internal data: TIPs provide context to internal logs and telemetry by offering up-to-date information on attack techniques and indicators of compromise (IOCs).
• Focus on active campaigns: Threat intelligence helps hunters prioritize their efforts on attacks that are actively targeting their industry or similar organizations.

Practical Example
A threat hunter uses SOCRadar to enrich network traffic logs with IOCs related to a known command-and-control (C2) server associated with a recent ransomware campaign. The hunter identifies outbound connections from the organization to this server, which were not previously flagged by automated detection systems, leading to the discovery of malware communication.        

By combining these techniques, threat hunters can uncover a wide range of threats that evade automated detection. From leveraging frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK to hypothesis-driven investigations, anomaly detection, and event correlation, these methods give hunters the flexibility and insight needed to detect sophisticated adversaries.

Integrating Threat Hunting into SOC Workflow

Effective threat hunting should not operate in isolation. The insights and discoveries made during hunts must be seamlessly integrated into the overall Security Operations Center (SOC) workflow. By doing so, the organization can maximize the value of threat hunting, improving automated detection systems, and ensuring that findings lead to timely and effective responses.

Now, we will focus on how threat hunting integrates with daily SOC operations, turning proactive insights into actionable results.

1. Seamless Transition to Security Alerts

The first step in integrating threat hunting into the SOC workflow is ensuring that the insights gained from hunts result in actionable security alerts. Without this transition, valuable information discovered during threat hunting may remain siloed, delaying responses to potential threats.

Automating Alerts Based on Hunting Discoveries

After a threat hunter identifies suspicious patterns or anomalies, they can create custom detection rules in SIEM or XDR platforms to ensure that similar activity triggers an alert in the future. This automation streamlines the transition from proactive threat hunting to ongoing monitoring, reducing the need for manual investigation of similar threats.

Practical Example
A threat hunter identifies a potential Pass-the-Ticket attack involving unusual service ticket requests (Event ID 4769). To ensure future occurrences of this behavior are caught early, they create a custom alert in Microsoft Sentinel that automatically triggers whenever similar service ticket requests involving privileged accounts are detected.        

2. From Alerting to Security Incident Response

Once a security alert is generated based on threat hunting findings, it should flow smoothly into the SOC’s security incident response process. This ensures that actionable insights are not only identified but also acted upon in a timely manner, enabling faster containment and mitigation of threats.

Integrating Detection and Response

Tools like Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Microsoft Sentinel allow for the seamless transition from detection to response. When an alert is generated from a hunting discovery, it can automatically escalate to the SOC’s security incident response team, triggering the appropriate containment, eradication, and recovery processes.

Escalation and Response Actions

Threat hunters should ensure that alerts tied to high-priority threats—such as compromised privileged accounts or lateral movement attempts—are escalated immediately. SOC teams can then take decisive actions, such as isolating compromised systems, disabling suspicious accounts, or initiating forensic investigations.

Practical Example
A hunter discovers suspicious logon activity that suggests lateral movement by an attacker using stolen credentials. After creating a custom detection rule, the next time similar activity is detected, Microsoft Sentinel triggers an alert, and the security incident is escalated to the SOC. The response team isolates the affected systems and begins investigating the attacker’s movement across the network.        

3. Avoiding Silos: Ensuring Threat Hunting Feeds SOC Operations

A common pitfall in many SOCs is the separation between threat hunting activities and day-to-day operations. If the insights gained from hunts remain isolated, they lose their potential to improve detection and response processes across the organization.

Collaborative Workflow

Threat hunters, detection engineers, and security incident responders must work together to ensure that the findings from threat hunting activities are acted upon. This collaboration helps the SOC improve its detection capabilities and reduces the likelihood that future security incidents go undetected.

Feedback Loop

A critical component of integrating threat hunting into the SOC workflow is creating a feedback loop. The findings from threat hunting activities should be used to fine-tune detection rules, adjust security incident response strategies, and improve overall SOC efficiency. This iterative process ensures that the SOC continually adapts and evolves in response to new threats.

Practical Example 
A threat hunter uncovers a novel method attackers are using to evade detection by modifying system processes. By working with the SOC detection team, they incorporate these findings into the SIEM’s detection rules, ensuring that similar behavior triggers alerts in the future. The security incident response team is also updated on this new technique, preparing them to act swiftly in case of a similar attack.        

4. Tracking the Full Investigation: From Hunt to Mitigation

To ensure that the insights gained from threat hunting are fully realized within the SOC, it’s important to track the progress of each investigation. This includes everything from the initial hypothesis and data collection phase to detection, incident response, and mitigation.

End-to-End Visibility

SOC managers and analysts need full visibility into the lifecycle of each investigation. By tracking investigations from hypothesis generation to final mitigation steps, the SOC ensures that no stage of the process is overlooked or delayed.

Continuous Learning and Documentation

Documenting each hunt and its outcomes ensures that lessons learned are incorporated into future hunts. This also provides the SOC with detailed forensic evidence, which can be critical for understanding attack methods and improving defenses.

Practical Example
In Microsoft Sentinel, a threat hunter documents the full process of investigating unusual lateral movement. They track the original hypothesis, the logs and telemetry analyzed, the findings of the hunt, and the final security incident response actions. This documentation ensures that future hunts can build on these insights, and that the security incident response team is prepared to handle similar attacks more efficiently.        

The Benefits of Integrating Threat Hunting into SOC Operations

When properly integrated into the SOC workflow, threat hunting provides immense value, helping to:

• Improve automated detection systems: Hunting insights help refine SIEM and XDR detection rules, making it easier to identify threats in the future.
• Enhance security incident response readiness: Findings from hunts ensure that the SOC is prepared to respond more quickly to new or evolving threats.
• Create a continuous improvement loop: Threat hunting enables a feedback loop, where each new discovery enhances the SOC’s overall security posture.

By integrating threat hunting with the broader detection and response processes, SOC teams can ensure that no potential threat is missed and that insights from proactive investigations are used to improve automated detection and security incident response workflows. This unified approach ensures that the SOC operates as a cohesive system, maximizing its ability to detect, investigate, and respond to advanced threats.

Strengthening SOC Capabilities Through Continuous Threat Hunting

In a rapidly evolving threat landscape, security threats are becoming more sophisticated and harder to detect. While automated detection systems are essential, they cannot catch every threat, particularly those that are carefully designed to evade detection. Continuous threat hunting offers a solution by ensuring that SOCs are not only reactive but also proactively searching for hidden threats and adapting to new attack techniques.

Now, we will focus on how continuous threat hunting enhances SOC capabilities and ensures a more resilient security posture.

1. Creating a Continuous Improvement Loop

Threat hunting provides SOCs with valuable insights into emerging threats and previously undetected attack patterns. By feeding these insights back into automated detection systems, SOCs can continuously improve their detection and response capabilities.

Iterative Learning and Refinement

Each threat hunt generates new data, lessons, and insights, which should be incorporated into the SOC’s workflows. This iterative process ensures that automated systems, such as SIEMs and XDR platforms, become more accurate over time, reducing false positives and identifying more subtle threats.

Practical Example
A SOC team identifies a new lateral movement technique during a threat hunt. After detecting and mitigating the attack, the insights gained are used to fine-tune detection rules in Microsoft Sentinel. The result is a more robust detection system that can automatically flag similar lateral movement attempts in the future.        

2. Enhancing Detection Systems with Custom Alert Rules

Continuous threat hunting helps SOCs identify patterns of behavior that were previously undetected by automated systems. Based on these discoveries, hunters can create custom alert rules that ensure future occurrences of similar behaviors are flagged and investigated.

Why Custom Alerts Are Essential

Threat hunters often uncover attack techniques that automated systems haven’t been programmed to detect. By creating custom rules, hunters ensure that these specific techniques trigger alerts in the future, preventing attackers from reusing the same methods.

Practical Example
A hunter identifies abnormal service ticket requests (Event ID 4769) as part of a Pass-the-Ticket attack. By adding a custom detection rule to Microsoft Sentinel, similar behavior will automatically generate alerts, reducing the need for manual detection and improving response times.        

3. Fine-Tuning Alert Thresholds to Reduce Noise

One of the challenges in SOCs is balancing detection accuracy with minimizing false positives. Continuous threat hunting allows SOC teams to fine-tune alert thresholds based on real-world data, ensuring that alerts are both accurate and actionable.

Reducing False Positives

Through continuous analysis and refinement, SOCs can adjust alert thresholds to focus on truly suspicious behavior while filtering out benign activity. This reduces alert fatigue for SOC analysts and ensures that they can focus on high-priority threats.

Practical Example
After several threat hunts, a SOC team refines the threshold for triggering alerts on failed logon attempts. Instead of alerting on every failed attempt, the SOC configures the SIEM to trigger an alert only when multiple failed logons (Event ID 4625) are followed by a successful logon (Event ID 4624) from a different IP address. This adjustment helps reduce noise from legitimate failed logons while improving detection of brute-force or credential stuffing attacks.        

4. Building Institutional Knowledge with Threat Hunting Documentation

One of the key benefits of continuous threat hunting is the institutional knowledge it builds within the SOC. By documenting the processes, insights, and results from each hunt, SOC teams can create a valuable resource for future investigations, improving the overall efficiency and knowledge base of the team.

Comprehensive Documentation

Each hunt should be documented from hypothesis generation through to final resolution, detailing the techniques used, findings uncovered, and actions taken. This creates a knowledge repository that SOC analysts can refer to during future investigations, ensuring that lessons learned are not lost.

Practical Example
In Microsoft Sentinel, a threat hunter documents their entire investigation into an attack involving Pass-the-Ticket techniques. This documentation serves as a guide for future hunts and ensures that other SOC analysts can replicate the successful detection strategy if a similar attack occurs.        

5. Increasing Agility and Adaptability in Threat Detection

By incorporating continuous threat hunting into SOC workflows, organizations can become more agile and adaptable in their detection and response efforts. Threat hunting provides SOC teams with the flexibility to investigate emerging threats, experiment with new hypotheses, and respond quickly to changes in the attack landscape.

Staying Ahead of Evolving Threats

Attackers constantly evolve their techniques to avoid detection. Continuous threat hunting allows SOCs to stay ahead of these changes by identifying new tactics before they become widespread. By continually hunting for new threats, SOCs remain proactive, preventing attackers from gaining the upper hand.

Practical Example
A SOC team regularly conducts threat hunts to identify potential weaknesses in their cloud environment. During one of these hunts, they discover that attackers are using a novel method to exploit cloud service credentials. By detecting this technique early, the SOC can implement defenses before attackers fully exploit the vulnerability.        

6. Strengthening Detection and Response Synergy

Continuous threat hunting strengthens the synergy between detection and response in the SOC. By improving detection capabilities through insights gained from hunts, the SOC ensures that responses to future security incidents are faster, more accurate, and better informed.

Improved Response Readiness

Threat hunting provides SOC teams with the information they need to fine-tune their security incident response playbooks. This improves response times, minimizes damage, and ensures that teams are better prepared to handle evolving threats.

Practical Example
After detecting a new form of lateral movement, a SOC team updates their security incident response playbook to include specific containment steps based on insights gained from the hunt. This ensures that the next time this form of attack is detected, the SOC can respond quickly and effectively.        

The Strategic Value of Continuous Threat Hunting

By making threat hunting a continuous practice, SOCs can stay ahead of adversaries, uncover hidden threats, and adapt to an evolving threat landscape. The insights gained from each hunt enhance detection capabilities, improve response readiness, and build institutional knowledge that strengthens the SOC over time.

• Proactive Defense: Continuous threat hunting ensures that SOC teams are not only reacting to alerts but actively searching for hidden threats, staying ahead of attackers.
• Iterative Improvement: Each hunt feeds back into improving the SOC’s automated detection systems, reducing false positives and improving detection accuracy.
• Stronger Security Posture: With continuous hunting, organizations are better prepared to detect, investigate, and respond to new and emerging threats, resulting in a more resilient and adaptive security posture.

By embedding threat hunting into daily operations, SOC teams can strengthen their defenses, ensure quicker response times, and maintain an edge over attackers who continuously evolve their tactics. Continuous threat hunting not only enhances the effectiveness of detection and response systems but also helps SOCs maintain a proactive and agile approach to cybersecurity.

Case Study 1

Detecting Lateral Movement via Unusual Logon Activity

Scenario

A financial services company noticed unusual internal network traffic patterns but received no alerts from their automated systems. A threat hunter, suspecting potential lateral movement by an attacker, initiated an investigation using the organization’s SIEM and EDR platform.

Step 1: Hypothesis Generation

The threat hunter hypothesized that an attacker had compromised a privileged user account and was moving laterally through the network undetected. The hypothesis was based on abnormal traffic patterns and involved correlating multiple logs and events.

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

• Tactic: Lateral Movement (TA0008)
• Technique: Remote Services (T1021)

Step 2: Data Collection and Aggregation

Using Microsoft Sentinel (SIEM) and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (EDR), the threat hunter queried logs to search for repeated logon attempts (Event ID 4624) across different systems within a short time frame. The analyst also analyzed network traffic logs to identify unusual communication between systems.

Step 3: Data Analysis and Investigation

The hunter discovered that a privileged user account had accessed several systems that the user typically didn’t log into. This anomaly, combined with unusual network traffic patterns, indicated that the attacker was moving laterally across the network using stolen credentials.

Step 4: Threat Detection

The hunter correlated these findings with further abnormal logon attempts from the same user account. Using log data from Microsoft Sentinel, the analyst detected additional unusual activity, including RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol) connections (Logon Type 10) to sensitive systems, suggesting lateral movement using compromised credentials.

Step 5: Escalation and Response

The findings were escalated to the SOC, triggering a response process that included isolating the affected systems, disabling the compromised account, and initiating a forensic investigation. The SOC team worked quickly to contain the threat and prevent further escalation.

Outcome

Thanks to the proactive threat hunt, the SOC was able to detect and mitigate the lateral movement before the attacker could cause significant damage. Insights from this hunt were used to fine-tune detection rules, ensuring similar security incidents could be automatically flagged in the future.

Lessons Learned

• Proactive threat hunting detected subtle lateral movement that automated systems missed.
• Early detection allowed the SOC to contain the threat before further damage could occur.
• Custom detection rules for lateral movement and logon anomalies were added to Microsoft Sentinel, improving future detection capabilities.

Case Study 2

Failure to Detect a Stealthy APT Campaign

Scenario

A healthcare organization was targeted by an Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) group that compromised a low-privileged user account via spear-phishing. Despite having robust detection systems in place, the attack went undetected for several weeks. A threat hunt was initiated after unusual outbound traffic patterns were noticed by a SOC analyst.

Step 1: Hypothesis Generation

The SOC analyst hypothesized that a compromised low-privileged account was being used to exfiltrate data from the network. The hypothesis was based on observed anomalies in network traffic during routine checks, indicating potential data exfiltration.

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

• Tactic: Exfiltration (TA0010)
• Technique: Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (T1048)

Step 2: Data Collection and Aggregation

The threat hunter used Microsoft Sentinel to aggregate data from multiple sources, including email servers, endpoints, and network traffic logs. The goal was to identify patterns of outbound traffic that deviated from normal behavior.

Step 3: Data Analysis and Investigation

The analysis revealed that small amounts of data were being exfiltrated to external servers over a long period, blending in with legitimate traffic. While the data exfiltration pattern was subtle, it became apparent after correlating outbound traffic with logon activity from the compromised account.

Step 4: Failure to Escalate

Despite identifying anomalies in outbound traffic, the threat hunter failed to escalate the issue promptly. The hunter decided to monitor the situation further, not realizing that the APT group was actively exfiltrating sensitive patient data using encrypted channels.

Outcome

Weeks later, the organization discovered that the APT group had been stealing sensitive data for several months. The slow exfiltration of data allowed the attackers to avoid detection, as the traffic blended into normal network activity. By the time the breach was fully uncovered, significant amounts of data had already been compromised.

Lessons Learned

• The failure to correlate low-volume data exfiltration with abnormal account activity allowed the APT campaign to persist undetected.
• Threat hunters should trust their instincts and escalate anomalies promptly, even if the evidence isn’t definitive.
• Outbound traffic anomalies, especially from low-privileged accounts, should be flagged and investigated early to prevent long-dwelling threats.

Key Takeaways from the Case Studies

Proactive Threat Hunting Detects What Automation Misses

In the first case, a proactive threat hunt uncovered lateral movement that automated systems didn’t flag, leading to early containment of the attack. This shows how critical human-led investigations are for detecting subtle threats.

Continuous Monitoring of Low-Volume Anomalies

The second case demonstrates the danger of underestimating low-volume anomalies. Small, stealthy exfiltration can go unnoticed for months if threat hunters don’t act quickly on suspicious behavior, particularly when low-privileged accounts are involved.

Iterative Learning

Both cases highlight the need to refine detection rules and response playbooks based on the insights gained from threat hunting. By integrating these lessons into SOC workflows, teams can improve their ability to detect and respond to similar threats in the future.

These case studies illustrate the real-world impact of effective threat hunting. Whether identifying lateral movement or uncovering stealthy exfiltration, threat hunting gives SOC teams the tools to detect advanced attacks that evade automated detection systems. By learning from each hunt and applying those insights to improve SOC processes, organizations can continuously strengthen their defenses against evolving threats.

Conclusion and Next Steps for Threat Hunting in SOCs

As cyber threats become more advanced, organizations must go beyond automated detection systems to stay ahead of adversaries. Threat hunting offers a proactive, human-led approach to uncovering hidden threats, reducing dwell time, and preventing sophisticated attacks from causing damage.

This guide has walked through the various stages of threat hunting, from hypothesis generation and data collection to analysis, detection, and security incident response. It has also highlighted how threat hunting can be integrated into SOC workflows to improve both detection accuracy and response efficiency.

Now, we turn to the key takeaways and next steps SOC teams should follow to implement effective and continuous threat hunting in their environments.

The Value of Threat Hunting

Proactive Defense Is Essential

While automated tools like SIEM and XDR platforms are crucial for modern security operations, they are not sufficient on their own. Proactive threat hunting fills the gap, helping SOC teams detect threats that evade traditional detection systems.

Iterative Learning and Continuous Improvement

Every threat hunt provides valuable insights that can be fed back into automated detection systems. This continuous learning process helps SOCs improve their detection rules, reduce false positives, and enhance security incident response playbooks.

Collaboration Enhances SOC Efficiency

Effective threat hunting requires collaboration between SOC teams, detection engineers, and security incident responders. By sharing findings and improving detection rules based on hunting activities, the entire SOC benefits from a unified and proactive defense approach.

Human Intuition Complements Automation

While automation plays an important role in security operations, human intuition and hypothesis-driven hunting remain irreplaceable when it comes to detecting subtle, stealthy attacks. Combining human-led investigations with machine-powered analytics creates a more effective defense against evolving threats.

Next Steps for Implementing Threat Hunting in Your SOC

Step 1: Establish a Threat Hunting Program

SOC teams should prioritize building a dedicated threat hunting program. This involves assigning skilled analysts to conduct regular hunts, set up structured processes, and align hunting activities with the organization’s risk profile and critical assets.

Tip
Begin by identifying high-priority areas, such as privileged accounts, critical systems, or sensitive data, and focus hunts on detecting threats that target these areas.        

Step 2: Integrate Threat Hunting into Daily Operations

To get the most out of threat hunting, it should be embedded into the daily operations of the SOC. Insights from threat hunts must feed back into detection and response workflows, creating a continuous improvement loop.

Tip
Set up regular feedback sessions between threat hunters and SOC analysts to share findings and update detection rules in SIEM and XDR platforms.        

Step 3: Build a Knowledge Base

Documenting threat hunting activities, including hypotheses, methodologies, and outcomes, builds institutional knowledge that strengthens the SOC over time. This documentation also serves as a resource for training new analysts and refining future hunts.

Tip
Create a centralized repository where all threat hunting reports, findings, and detection rule updates are stored. Ensure that all SOC team members have access to this resource.        

Step 4: Leverage Threat Intelligence

External threat intelligence platforms provide valuable context to internal data and can guide hunting activities toward emerging threats. Integrating threat intelligence ensures that hunts are relevant and aligned with real-world attack patterns.

Tip
Incorporate threat intelligence from platforms like SOCRadar into your hunts to stay ahead of adversaries who may be targeting your industry or similar organizations.        

Step 5: Automate Wherever Possible

While threat hunting is a human-driven activity, automation can streamline the process by enabling the creation of custom alert rules based on findings. By automating future detections of identified threats, SOCs can reduce manual effort and improve response times.

Tip
Use tools like Microsoft Sentinel to automate alerts for patterns identified during hunts, ensuring that future security incidents are caught faster and with less manual intervention.        

Fostering a Culture of Continuous Improvement

To maintain a proactive security posture, SOC teams should adopt a mindset of continuous improvement. Threat landscapes are always evolving, and adversaries will keep developing new tactics to evade detection. By regularly conducting threat hunts, refining detection capabilities, and updating security incident response strategies, SOCs can stay agile and resilient.

Key Actions

• Regularly review the effectiveness of your automated detection systems and update them based on threat hunting insights.
• Conduct periodic training for SOC analysts on the latest threat hunting techniques and tools, ensuring that the team is always prepared to tackle new threats.
• Share findings across teams, so that lessons learned from one hunt are applied to all future detection and response efforts.

Threat hunting is not just a supplementary activity — it’s a core component of modern SOC operations. As attackers become more sophisticated, SOCs that incorporate continuous threat hunting will be better equipped to defend against advanced threats, close security gaps, and reduce the time attackers spend undetected within networks.

By embedding threat hunting into everyday workflows, investing in the right tools and training, and fostering a culture of continuous improvement, SOCs can transform their security posture from reactive to proactive. The result is a more agile, resilient, and well-prepared team capable of handling the evolving challenges of cybersecurity.

Next Steps for SOC Teams

1. Launch a Threat Hunting Program: Develop a structured approach to regular threat hunts focused on critical assets.
2. Integrate Hunting with Detection Systems: Use hunting insights to improve automated detection and response capabilities.
3. Leverage Threat Intelligence: Incorporate external threat intelligence into your hunting activities to stay ahead of new attack trends.
4. Automate Future Detections: Create custom alert rules to detect similar behaviors in the future, reducing manual workloads.
5. Build and Maintain a Knowledge Base: Document findings to build a comprehensive resource that supports continuous improvement.

By following these steps, SOC teams can ensure they remain proactive, adaptable, and prepared to combat the increasingly complex threats of today’s cybersecurity landscape.

Additional Resources

To enhance your threat hunting capabilities and further your knowledge, here are some additional resources, training programs, and tools to consider:

Threat Hunting Guides and Resources

Microsoft Sentinel Threat Hunting Guide

A comprehensive set of resources for using Microsoft Sentinel in threat hunting operations. These guides cover practical steps, tools, and sample queries to help analysts effectively track potential threats across complex environments.

• Azure Sentinel Threat Hunting Overview: This guide introduces key features and capabilities for threat hunting in Microsoft Sentinel.
• Azure Sentinel Hunting Queries: Provides sample queries for hunting specific threats, allowing analysts to tailor their searches.
• Threat Hunting with Microsoft Sentinel (Training Module): An in-depth training module designed to teach SOC analysts how to use Microsoft Sentinel for proactive threat hunting.

SOCRadar Threat Intelligence Integration

SOCRadar’s platform provides extensive threat intelligence that seamlessly integrates with SIEMs like Microsoft Sentinel. It offers real-time alerts on emerging threats and helps SOC teams enhance their threat hunting by leveraging external intelligence sources to track and mitigate advanced adversaries.

• Explore SOCRadar: Learn more about how SOCRadar’s threat intelligence platform supports SOC teams with up-to-date, actionable intelligence that strengthens threat hunting efforts.

Training Programs and Certifications

• EC-Council Certified Threat Intelligence Analyst (CTIA) This certification provides in-depth training on how to collect, analyze, and respond to cyber threats using threat intelligence. It’s a great choice for security professionals looking to specialize in threat intelligence.
• MAD Threat Hunting and Detection Engineering (MITRE ATT&CK Defender™) A certification focused on developing threat hunting and detection engineering skills using the MITRE ATT&CK framework. It’s designed to help SOC analysts build more effective defense strategies.
• SANS Institute: SEC511 – Continuous Monitoring and Security Operations This advanced course focuses on SOC operations, continuous monitoring, and proactive threat detection. It’s highly recommended for SOC analysts aiming to improve their threat hunting and monitoring skills.

Threat Intelligence Platforms

• SOCRadar A threat intelligence platform that provides real-time threat intelligence to SOC teams. Integrating SOCRadar with your SIEM can help detect and track emerging threats before they hit your organization.
• Recorded Future Recorded Future combines machine learning and human analysis to deliver comprehensive threat intelligence insights, enabling organizations to anticipate, detect, and mitigate cyber threats.

Security Best Practices and Frameworks

• MITRE ATT&CK A globally recognized framework that maps adversarial tactics and techniques, providing detailed insights into how attackers operate. This is a key resource for SOC teams conducting threat hunting and for enhancing detection capabilities.
• NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) The NIST CSF provides a set of guidelines and best practices for managing and reducing cybersecurity risks. It can help SOC teams align their threat hunting practices with broader security policies.
• SANS Institute – Security Best Practices SANS offers a wide range of resources and whitepapers on cybersecurity best practices, including threat hunting methodologies, security incident response, and SOC optimization.

Community Resources and Forums

• MITRE ATT&CK GitHub Repository An open-source repository where SOC teams can access use cases, attack mappings, and sample detection rules aligned with MITRE ATT&CK.
• Threat Hunting Community (Slack Group) A Slack-based community where threat hunters share insights, tools, and techniques, offering support to analysts seeking real-time advice on threat hunting operations. Join the Slack Group

These resources will help you deepen your understanding of threat hunting, sharpen your skills, and stay up-to-date with emerging threats and best practices.

Glossary

Access Control

A security technique that regulates who or what can view or use resources in a computing environment. It includes policies, processes, and technologies designed to prevent unauthorized access.

Advanced Persistent Threat (APT)

A prolonged and targeted cyberattack in which an attacker gains access to a network and remains undetected for an extended period, typically to steal sensitive information or disrupt operations.

Attack Surface

The sum of all potential entry points through which an unauthorized user can attempt to enter a network or system. Reducing the attack surface helps to minimize the risk of attacks.

Authentication

The process of verifying the identity of a user or system. Multi-factor authentication (MFA) enhances security by requiring additional forms of verification, such as a password and a one-time code.

Behavioral Analytics

A form of threat detection that analyzes patterns in user and system behaviors to identify deviations from the norm. It is often used to detect insider threats or compromised accounts.

Brute-Force Attack

A method of systematically trying multiple combinations of passwords or keys to gain unauthorized access to a system. This attack often targets weak or easily guessable passwords.

Cloud Security

The set of policies, technologies, and controls deployed to protect data, applications, and infrastructure in cloud environments. SOCs are increasingly involved in monitoring cloud security as organizations adopt cloud services.

Command and Control (C2)

The infrastructure used by attackers to communicate with compromised systems within a network. Command and control servers manage malware, issue instructions, and facilitate data exfiltration.

Credential Dumping

A technique used by attackers to extract stored credentials, such as password hashes or Kerberos tickets, from a system. This information is often used to escalate privileges or move laterally within a network.

Defense-in-Depth

A multi-layered strategy used to protect information by combining several security measures. By using multiple layers of defense, such as firewalls, encryption, and endpoint security, the likelihood of a successful attack is reduced.

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

A security solution that continuously monitors and responds to cyber threats at the device level. EDR tools provide real-time visibility into endpoint activity and are critical for detecting malware, fileless attacks, and lateral movement.

Exfiltration

The unauthorized transfer of data from a network to an external system or server. Exfiltration often occurs through covert channels and is a key objective in data breaches.

False Positive

A security alert triggered by normal, non-malicious activity. High false-positive rates can lead to alert fatigue among SOC analysts, which reduces their ability to respond to legitimate threats.

Fileless Malware

A type of malware that operates in-memory without leaving files on the disk, making it more difficult for traditional antivirus programs to detect. Fileless malware is often used in advanced attacks.

Indicators of Attack (IOA)

Observable behaviors or actions that suggest an attack is in progress. Unlike IOCs, which are focused on evidence of compromise, IOAs help identify live attacks based on suspicious activity patterns.

Indicators of Compromise (IOC)

Artifacts or forensic evidence that indicate a system has been compromised. Common IOCs include unusual traffic patterns, file hashes associated with malware, or unexpected system changes.

Intrusion Detection System (IDS)

A network or host-based system designed to detect unauthorized access or anomalies in network traffic. IDSs can alert security teams to potential security incidents, though they typically require human intervention for a response.

Kerberos

A network authentication protocol that uses tickets to allow nodes to prove their identity in a secure manner. Kerberos is widely used in Active Directory environments and is a target for attacks like Pass-the-Ticket.

Key Distribution Center (KDC)

A critical component of Kerberos authentication responsible for issuing Ticket Granting Tickets (TGTs) and Service Tickets. Compromising the KDC can lead to attacks like Pass-the-Ticket or Golden Ticket.

Lateral Movement

An attack technique where an adversary moves through a network to gain higher privileges or access more valuable data. It is often used by attackers to escalate privileges after the initial compromise.

Least Privilege Access

A principle that dictates users should only have the minimal level of access necessary to perform their job functions. Enforcing least privilege helps reduce the risk of insider threats and limits the damage from compromised accounts.

Log Analysis

The process of analyzing system logs to detect security incidents, anomalies, or operational issues. Log analysis is a key function of SOCs, allowing teams to identify patterns of behavior that may indicate threats.

MITRE ATT&CK

A framework for describing the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) used by adversaries during cyberattacks. It is commonly used by SOCs and threat hunters to map detected behaviors to known adversary methods.

Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)

An authentication method that requires two or more verification factors, such as a password and a one-time code, to log into a system. MFA adds a layer of security to prevent unauthorized access even if credentials are compromised.

Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)

The practice of monitoring and analyzing network traffic to detect suspicious patterns or behaviors. NTA tools help detect anomalies such as data exfiltration, command-and-control traffic, or lateral movement.

Pass-the-Hash Attack

A technique in which an attacker uses the hash of a password to authenticate without needing the actual password. This attack exploits weaknesses in the authentication process, allowing lateral movement or privilege escalation.

Pass-the-Ticket Attack

A Kerberos-based attack where an attacker uses a stolen service or Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT) to authenticate across multiple systems without needing the user's credentials. Mimikatz is a commonly used tool for carrying out this attack.

Phishing

A form of social engineering where attackers attempt to trick users into revealing sensitive information, such as passwords or credit card numbers, by pretending to be a legitimate entity via email, phone, or websites.

Privilege Escalation

A process by which an attacker gains elevated access to resources that are normally protected. This can happen through exploiting vulnerabilities or misconfigurations in a system.

Ransomware

A type of malware that encrypts a victim's files or systems and demands a ransom in exchange for the decryption key. Ransomware attacks can cause significant disruption to businesses and critical infrastructure.

Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP)

A protocol that allows remote access to a computer over a network. RDP is often targeted by attackers for lateral movement or to gain access to sensitive systems, especially in poorly secured environments.

Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)

A platform that aggregates, analyzes, and correlates logs and events from multiple sources, providing a centralized view of security activities. SIEMs enable SOC teams to monitor security incidents in real-time and analyze historical data for investigation.

Security Operations Center (SOC)

A centralized team of security professionals responsible for monitoring, detecting, and responding to security incidents. SOCs use tools like SIEM and EDR to manage the security posture of an organization and address potential threats.

Service Ticket (TGS)

A ticket used in Kerberos authentication to access specific services after being granted a Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT). Attackers can steal service tickets to move laterally within a network without re-authenticating.

Stealthy Attack

An attack designed to blend into legitimate traffic or activity to avoid detection. Stealthy attacks often use techniques like fileless malware, encrypted communications, or legitimate credentials to hide their activities.

Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP)

A tool that aggregates external threat intelligence, such as information about emerging threats, known vulnerabilities, or adversary campaigns. TIPs help SOC teams prioritize and focus on relevant threat hunting activities.

Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT)

A core part of Kerberos authentication, the Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT) is issued by the Key Distribution Center (KDC) and allows users to request access to network services. In attacks like Pass-the-Ticket, adversaries steal and reuse TGTs to move laterally.

Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs)

A description of how attackers operate, including their overarching tactics, specific techniques used to carry out attacks, and detailed procedures for executing those techniques. MITRE ATT&CK is the most widely recognized framework for mapping TTPs.

Zero-Day Vulnerability

A software vulnerability that is unknown to the software maker and has no available patch. Zero-day vulnerabilities are highly valuable to attackers, who can exploit them before the organization has time to react or deploy fixes.