MITRE ATT&CK & Anomaly Detection
Are your detections actually covering the threats that matter? Learn how to use the MITRE ATT&CK matrix to find coverage gaps and configure anomaly detection in Microsoft Sentinel.
What is the MITRE ATT&CK matrix?
Think of a burglarβs playbook. There are only so many ways to break into a house: pick the lock, smash a window, social-engineer a key from the cleaner, climb through the roof. Each method is a βtechnique.β
The MITRE ATT&CK matrix is the burglarβs playbook for cyberattacks. It catalogues every known technique attackers use, organised by tactics (what they want to achieve) and techniques (how they do it). From initial access through data exfiltration β every step is documented.
In Sentinel, you can overlay your analytics rules onto the MITRE matrix and instantly see: which techniques are you detecting, and which ones are you blind to? Those gaps are where attackers will slip through.
The MITRE ATT&CK matrix in Sentinel
14 tactics (the attack lifecycle)
| # | Tactic | What the Attacker Wants |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Reconnaissance | Gather information about the target |
| 2 | Resource Development | Set up infrastructure for the attack |
| 3 | Initial Access | Get a foothold (phishing, exploit, valid accounts) |
| 4 | Execution | Run malicious code |
| 5 | Persistence | Maintain access after reboot/remediation |
| 6 | Privilege Escalation | Get higher-level access |
| 7 | Defense Evasion | Avoid detection |
| 8 | Credential Access | Steal passwords, tokens, keys |
| 9 | Discovery | Learn about the environment |
| 10 | Lateral Movement | Move to other systems |
| 11 | Collection | Gather data of interest |
| 12 | Command and Control | Communicate with compromised systems |
| 13 | Exfiltration | Steal data out |
| 14 | Impact | Destroy, encrypt, or manipulate data |
Coverage analysis in Sentinel
Sentinelβs MITRE ATT&CK page shows:
- Green cells β techniques with at least one active analytics rule
- Yellow cells β techniques with a data connector but no analytics rule
- Empty cells β techniques with no detection or data source
The goal is to minimise empty cells, especially for techniques commonly used against your industry.
Scenario: James audits Pacific Meridian's coverage
James opens Sentinelβs MITRE ATT&CK page and reviews coverage:
Strong coverage (green): Initial Access, Execution, Credential Access β lots of rules from Content Hub Partial coverage (yellow): Lateral Movement β data connectors active but no custom rules Blind spot (empty): Defense Evasion (T1562 β Impair Defenses), Exfiltration (T1048 β Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol)
James priorities:
- Lateral Movement β enable Content Hub analytics rules and write custom detections for PsExec and RDP lateral movement
- Defense Evasion β create rules detecting tamper protection disablement and audit log clearing
- Exfiltration β deploy custom detections for DNS tunnelling and unusual upload volumes
The MITRE page becomes his detection engineering roadmap.
Exam tip: MITRE drives SOC optimization
When the exam asks βhow to identify gaps in detection coverage,β the answer is the MITRE ATT&CK matrix in Sentinel. It directly connects to SOC optimization recommendations (Module 1) β Sentinel suggests new analytics rules based on your MITRE gaps.
Anomaly detection in Sentinel
Analytics rules catch known patterns. Anomaly rules catch unknown deviations.
How anomaly detection works
- Sentinel learns a baseline β what is normal behaviour for your environment over a training period
- Continuous monitoring β compares current activity against the baseline
- Anomaly detected β when behaviour deviates significantly, an anomaly record is created
- Analyst investigation β anomalies appear in the Anomalies table for review
Built-in anomaly rules
Sentinel ships with anomaly rules that detect:
- Anomalous login activity β unusual time, location, or device for a user
- Anomalous resource access β user accessing resources they have never touched before
- Anomalous data transfer β unusual volume of data being moved or downloaded
- Anomalous privilege use β sudden escalation or use of admin privileges
- Anomalous process execution β new or rare processes running on endpoints
Customising anomalies
You can tune anomaly rules by adjusting:
- Threshold β how far from baseline a behaviour must deviate to trigger
- Scope β which users, devices, or resources to monitor
- Exclusions β known-safe deviations (e.g., quarterly batch jobs that spike data transfers)
| Feature | Analytics Rules | Anomaly Rules |
|---|---|---|
| Detection method | KQL query matching defined patterns | Statistical deviation from learned baseline |
| What they catch | Known threat patterns (brute force, C2, exfiltration) | Unknown deviations (first-time access, unusual volumes, new behaviour) |
| Configuration | Write KQL, set frequency, map entities | Enable built-in rule, tune thresholds |
| Output | Alerts and incidents | Records in the Anomalies table (lower signal than alerts) |
| False positive rate | Low (if well-written) | Higher β baseline deviations are not always malicious |
| Complementary? | Yes β use both together for comprehensive detection | Yes β anomalies fill gaps that rules-based detection misses |
Scenario: Tyler uses anomalies to catch a stealthy attacker
Tyler at CipherStack has strong analytics rules for brute force, phishing, and malware. But a sophisticated attacker used valid stolen credentials β no brute force, no malware, no phishing detected.
The attacker logged in at 2 AM (unusual for that user), accessed the source code repository (never done before), and downloaded 3 GB of data (baseline was 50 MB/day). None of Tylerβs KQL rules fired.
But three anomaly rules did:
- Anomalous login activity β flagged the 2 AM login
- Anomalous resource access β flagged the first-time repo access
- Anomalous data transfer β flagged the 3 GB download
Tyler correlated these anomalies and identified the compromised account within hours.
James reviews Pacific Meridian's MITRE ATT&CK page and sees that Lateral Movement techniques are yellow (data connectors active but no analytics rules). What should he do?
A sophisticated attacker at CipherStack uses valid stolen credentials to access systems. No brute force, malware, or phishing alerts fire. Which Sentinel feature is most likely to detect this?
π¬ Video coming soon
Next up: Domain 1 wraps up with a synthesis module β putting detection engineering together: custom detections, analytics rules, threat intelligence, and MITRE coverage working as one system.