Implement MITRE ATT&CK coverage mapping to identify detection gaps, prioritize rule development, and measure SOC detection maturity against adversary techniques.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionimplementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mappingExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping from mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping. Access via /implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
0
total installs
0
this week
8.6K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
8.6K
stars
| name | implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping |
| description | Implement MITRE ATT&CK coverage mapping to identify detection gaps, prioritize rule development, and measure SOC detection maturity against adversary techniques. |
| domain | cybersecurity |
| subdomain | soc-operations |
| tags | - mitre-attack - detection-coverage - gap-analysis - attack-navigator - soc - detection-engineering |
| version | '1.0' |
| author | mahipal |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| nist_ai_rmf | - MEASURE-2.7 - MAP-5.1 - MANAGE-2.4 |
| atlas_techniques | - AML.T0070 - AML.T0066 - AML.T0082 |
| d3fend_techniques | - Token Binding - Restore Access - Application Protocol Command Analysis - Password Authentication - Reissue Credential |
| nist_csf | - DE.CM-01 - DE.AE-02 - RS.MA-01 - DE.AE-06 |
MITRE ATT&CK coverage mapping gives SOC teams a structured, adversary-centric lens to evaluate detection capabilities. Enterprise SIEMs on average have detection coverage for only 21% of ATT&CK techniques (2025 CardinalOps report), with 13% of existing rules being non-functional due to misconfigured data sources. Systematic coverage mapping identifies gaps, prioritizes rule development, and tracks detection maturity over time. ATT&CK v18.1 (December 2025) is the latest version.
# Splunk ES - Export all active correlation searches with MITRE mappings
| rest /services/saved/searches
| search disabled=0 action.correlationsearch.enabled=1
| table title, search, action.notable.param.security_domain,
action.notable.param.severity, action.correlationsearch.annotations
| eval mitre_techniques=mvfilter(match('action.correlationsearch.annotations', "mitre_attack"))
// Microsoft Sentinel - Export analytics rules with MITRE mapping
SecurityAlert
| summarize count() by AlertName, ProductName
| join kind=inner (
resources
| where type == "microsoft.securityinsights/alertrules"
| extend tactics = properties.tactics
) on $left.AlertName == $right.name
{
"name": "SOC Detection Coverage - 2025",
"versions": {
"attack": "16",
"navigator": "5.1",
"layer": "4.5"
},
"domain": "enterprise-attack",
"description": "Current detection coverage mapping",
"techniques": [
{
"techniqueID": "T1110",
"tactic": "credential-access",
"color": "#00ff00",
"comment": "2 active rules - Brute Force detection via EventCode 4625",
"score": 75,
"metadata": [
{"name": "rule_count", "value": "2"},
{"name": "data_sources", "value": "Windows Security Log, Linux Auth"},
{"name": "last_validated", "value": "2025-01-15"}
]
},
{
"techniqueID": "T1059.001",
"tactic": "execution",
"color": "#00ff00",
"comment": "3 rules - PowerShell Script Block Logging",
"score": 85
},
{
"techniqueID": "T1055",
"tactic": "defense-evasion",
"color": "#ff0000",
"comment": "NO DETECTION - Requires Sysmon EventCode 8/10",
"score": 0
}
],
"gradient": {
"colors": ["#ff0000", "#ffff00", "#00ff00"],
"minValue": 0,
"maxValue": 100
}
}
| Score | Color | Meaning | Criteria |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Red | No Detection | No rules, missing data sources |
| 25 | Orange | Minimal | Rule exists but not validated/tested |
| 50 | Yellow | Partial | Rule works but limited coverage |
| 75 | Light Green | Good | Validated rule with good data sources |
| 100 | Green | Excellent | Multiple validated rules, tested with emulation |
Score = Data_Source_Score (0-25) + Rule_Quality_Score (0-25) +
Validation_Score (0-25) + Enrichment_Score (0-25)
Data_Source_Score:
25: All required data sources ingested and parsed
15: Primary data source available
5: Partial data source coverage
0: Required data sources not available
Rule_Quality_Score:
25: Rule uses CIM-compliant queries with proper thresholds
15: Rule works but may generate false positives
5: Basic rule with no tuning
0: No detection rule
Validation_Score:
25: Validated with adversary emulation (Atomic Red Team)
15: Tested with synthetic data
5: Logic reviewed but not tested
0: Not validated
Enrichment_Score:
25: Context-rich with asset, identity, and TI enrichment
15: Basic enrichment (asset lookup)
5: No enrichment
0: N/A (no rule)
Priority = Technique_Prevalence x Impact x Feasibility
Technique_Prevalence (0-10):
- Based on MITRE Top Techniques report
- Frequency in your industry's threat landscape
- Observed in recent incidents/breaches
Impact (0-10):
- Damage potential if technique succeeds
- Difficulty of recovery
- Data sensitivity at risk
Feasibility (0-10):
- Data source availability
- Rule complexity
- Engineering effort required
| Technique | ID | Prevalence | Typical Gap Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Command and Scripting Interpreter | T1059 | Very High | Requires script block logging |
| Phishing | T1566 | Very High | Email gateway integration |
| Valid Accounts | T1078 | High | Baseline behavior needed |
| Process Injection | T1055 | High | Requires Sysmon or EDR |
| Lateral Movement (RDP/SMB) | T1021 | High | Network segmentation visibility |
| Scheduled Task/Job | T1053 | High | Event log collection |
| Data Encrypted for Impact | T1486 | High | File system monitoring |
| Ingress Tool Transfer | T1105 | Medium | Network traffic analysis |
Quarter 1: Close Critical Gaps (Score 0, High Prevalence)
Week 1-2: Enable missing data sources
Week 3-4: Build and test rules for top 5 gap techniques
Week 5-8: Validate with adversary emulation
Week 9-12: Tune and operationalize
Quarter 2: Improve Partial Coverage (Score 25-50)
- Upgrade existing rules with enrichment
- Add secondary detection methods
- Validate with purple team exercises
Quarter 3: Mature Good Coverage (Score 50-75)
- Add behavioral analytics
- Implement detection-as-code pipeline
- Cross-technique correlation rules
Quarter 4: Excellence (Score 75-100)
- Continuous testing with BAS tools
- Automated coverage regression testing
- Red team validation
# Map available data sources to detectable techniques
DATA_SOURCE_TECHNIQUE_MAP = {
"Windows Security Event Log": [
"T1110", "T1078", "T1053.005", "T1098", "T1136",
"T1070.001", "T1021.001", "T1543.003"
],
"Sysmon": [
"T1055", "T1059", "T1003", "T1547.001", "T1036",
"T1218", "T1105", "T1071"
],
"Network Traffic (Firewall/IDS)": [
"T1071", "T1048", "T1105", "T1572", "T1090",
"T1571", "T1573"
],
"DNS Logs": [
"T1071.004", "T1568", "T1583.001", "T1048.003"
],
"Email Gateway": [
"T1566.001", "T1566.002", "T1534"
],
"Cloud Audit Logs": [
"T1078.004", "T1537", "T1530", "T1580",
"T1087.004", "T1098.001"
],
}
| inputlookup mitre_coverage_lookup
| stats avg(score) as avg_score count(eval(score=0)) as no_coverage
count(eval(score>0 AND score<50)) as partial
count(eval(score>=50 AND score<75)) as good
count(eval(score>=75)) as excellent
count as total
by tactic
| eval coverage_pct=round((total - no_coverage) / total * 100, 1)
| sort -coverage_pct
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
We added implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
Useful defaults in implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
I recommend implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
Keeps context tight: implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
We added implementing-mitre-attack-coverage-mapping from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
showing 1-10 of 49