Skip to content
Back to skills

Sota Detection Engineering

ASecurity

State-of-the-art detection engineering, SOC, threat hunting, and incident response (2026). Use when BUILDING detective controls or SOC capability — Sigma/YARA/Falco/Tetragon/Suricata rules, detection-as-code, MITRE ATT&CK coverage, SIEM detections, alert triage and SOAR, threat hunts, threat-intel, deception, IR playbooks, or adversary emulation — AND when AUDITING detection & IR posture (can we detect this? does this alert fire?). Owns DETECTIVE controls, SOC workflow, hunting, and IR (sota-...

  • 22 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 1, 2026
ai-agentsrustgoexpressrailsawstestingapisecurityperformance

Works with

  • cli
  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Pro scans all 8 files and shows the line behind each finding

Scanned September 25, 2026

npx -y skills add martinholovsky/SOTA-skills --skill sota-detection-engineering --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Sota Detection Engineering?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Sota Detection Engineering
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/martinholovsky-sota-detection-engineering/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/martinholovsky-sota-detection-engineering)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: sota-detection-engineering
description: >-
  State-of-the-art detection engineering, SOC, threat hunting, and incident
  response (2026). Use when BUILDING detective controls or SOC capability —
  Sigma/YARA/Falco/Tetragon/Suricata rules, detection-as-code, MITRE ATT&CK
  coverage, SIEM detections, alert triage and SOAR, threat hunts,
  threat-intel, deception, IR playbooks, or adversary emulation — AND when
  AUDITING detection & IR posture (can we detect this? does this alert fire?).
  Owns DETECTIVE controls, SOC workflow, hunting, and IR (sota-observability
  owns the telemetry pipeline). Trigger keywords: detection engineering,
  detection-as-code, Sigma, YARA, YARA-X, Falco, Tetragon, Suricata, SIEM,
  KQL, SPL, EQL, ATT&CK, Pyramid of Pain, threat hunting, threat intel, TIP,
  STIX, TAXII, IOC, IOA, TTP, SOC, alert fatigue, tuning, SOAR, runbook,
  incident response, IR playbook, NIST 800-61, PICERL, forensics, chain of
  custody, purple team, honeypot, honeytoken, canary, OCSF, MTTD, false
  positive, Active Directory, Kerberoasting, DCSync, golden ticket, ADCS,
  RBCD.
---

# SOTA Detection Engineering, SOC & Incident Response

## Purpose

Assume prevention fails. This skill builds and audits the layer that *notices*:
detective controls, the SOC that triages them, the hunts that find what alerts
miss, and the IR process that contains what hunts surface. One question defines
success:

> **When a real adversary acts inside your environment, does a high-fidelity
> signal fire, reach a human (or automation) with the context to act, and drive
> a bounded response — fast enough to matter?**

Detection is engineering, not art. Detections are **code**: version-controlled,
peer-reviewed, CI-tested, ATT&CK-mapped, FP-budgeted, and retired when stale.
The dominant failure mode is not missing rules — it is **alert fatigue**: noise
that buries the one true positive. Optimize signal-to-noise relentlessly.

**Ownership boundary.** `sota-observability` owns the telemetry pipeline (logs,
metrics, traces, SLOs, log shipping, retention plumbing). This skill owns
turning that telemetry into *security* detections, the SOC workflow, hunting,
and IR. `sota-threat-modeling` owns design-time threat enumeration (STRIDE/
ATT&CK/ATLAS catalogs); this skill owns catching those threats at runtime. If
you find yourself designing the logging schema, that's observability rules/01;
if you find yourself enumerating threats on a DFD, that's threat-modeling.

## BUILD mode

Run the detection lifecycle as a loop, not a one-shot. Hypothesis → build →
test → deploy → tune → retire. Workflow:

1. **Start from a threat hypothesis, not a tool.** Name the ATT&CK technique or
   abuse case, the adversary behavior, and the telemetry that would witness it.
   Use the **ADS framework** (Palantir): goal, categorization (ATT&CK), strategy
   abstract, technical context, blind spots/assumptions, false positives,
   validation, priority. Write this *before* the rule.
2. **Confirm the log source exists first.** You cannot detect what you do not
   collect. Map the hypothesis to a concrete data source (EDR, cloud audit, K8s
   audit, network/flow, identity, app). If it's missing, the deliverable is a
   *logging gap*, not a rule. See rules/02.
3. **Detect behavior over artifacts.** Climb the **Pyramid of Pain**: prefer
   TTP/behavioral logic over brittle hashes/IPs/domains. IOC matches are cheap
   and disposable; TTP detections cost the adversary real money to evade.
4. **Pick the right engine** (rules/03): Sigma for log detections (vendor-
   agnostic, compiled to your SIEM), YARA-X for file/memory/malware, Suricata
   for network, Falco/Tetragon for eBPF runtime/container/K8s, SIEM-native
   (KQL/SPL/EQL) for correlation the portable formats can't express.
5. **Engineer for low FP from the start** (rules/04): scope tightly, add
   allowlist context, require corroboration for noisy signals, set a severity
   honestly. Every detection ships with a runbook (link to observability
   rules/04 alerting plumbing) and an owner.
6. **Test before deploy.** Validate with adversary emulation — Atomic Red Team
   (endpoint), Stratus Red Team (cloud), Caldera (campaigns). Confirm the
   detection fires on the real technique and stays quiet on benign baselines.
   No detection merges without a passing test. See rules/06.
7. **Map coverage and find gaps.** Track every detection against ATT&CK with the
   Navigator. Coverage heatmaps reveal blind spots — feed them back to step 1.
8. **Tune and retire.** Review FP rates, suppress with *expiry* (never forever),
   delete detections nobody trusts. A muted alert is worse than none.

For hunting and deception, see rules/05; for IR, see rules/06.

## AUDIT mode

Assess an existing detection/SOC/IR posture adversarially. Read rules/06 (IR &
validation) and rules/04 (SOC/triage) first. Sample real detections, real
alerts, and real incidents — do not trust a coverage dashboard or a wiki
runbook that has never fired. The cardinal test: pick three ATT&CK techniques
relevant to the environment and prove, end to end, that each would be caught.

**Severity:**

| Severity | Meaning | Examples |
|----------|---------|----------|
| Critical | Blind to a primary attack path, or IR cannot execute | No log source for the crown-jewel system; no EDR/cloud-audit/K8s-audit collection; no IR plan or no one on call; detections exist but nothing routes alerts to a human |
| High | Major coverage gap or SOC dysfunction | Alert fatigue (analysts mute/ignore); detections never tested against the technique; IOC-only coverage of behaviors that need TTP logic; runbooks absent or stale; no ATT&CK coverage map; retention too short for IR |
| Medium | Degraded fidelity or process gaps | Detections with no owner/ADS doc; suppressions with no expiry; no deduplication/correlation; severity inflation; no purple-team/regression testing; TI not operationalized into detections |
| Low | Hygiene | Detections not in version control; inconsistent naming; no FP metrics; Navigator layer stale; no blameless PIR template |
| Info | Observation / hardening opportunity | Deception not deployed where it'd be high-value; coverage maturity below target; SOAR automation candidates |

**Finding format** (one per finding):

```
file:line | rule | severity | effort (trivial/small/medium/large) | fix
```

Example:

```
detections/aws/iam.yml:14 | ioc-only-detection-of-ttp-behavior | High | medium |
  GuardDuty-finding-name match is brittle; rewrite as CloudTrail behavioral
  Sigma rule on CreateAccessKey+AttachUserPolicy by non-admin principal,
  test with Stratus Red Team aws.persistence.iam-create-admin-access-key.
```

Conclude with the verdict: **for the top 3 techniques in scope, is detection
PRESENT / PARTIAL / ABSENT end-to-end** (signal → alert → human → response),
and the shortest path to closing the worst gap.

## Rules index

| File | Read this when... |
|------|-------------------|
| `rules/01-detection-engineering-discipline.md` | Running the detection lifecycle, writing ADS docs, doing detection-as-code (CI/peer review/regression), mapping coverage to ATT&CK + Navigator, applying the Pyramid of Pain, picking maturity targets and metrics (coverage/precision/MTTD) |
| `rules/02-telemetry-siem-data-layer.md` | Deciding what to collect (the #1 gap), choosing SIEM/data-lake, normalizing with OCSF/ECS, sizing retention for IR/hunting, controlling volume/cost, assessing data quality; application & behavioural detections (app-login spraying/stuffing/impossible travel, LLM/agent runtime and model-API-as-C2, data-access exfiltration and DB anomalies) |
| `rules/03-rule-languages-engines.md` | Choosing and writing detections in Sigma, YARA/YARA-X, Suricata, Falco, Tetragon, or SIEM-native (KQL/SPL/EQL); rule quality, specificity, FP-resistance, performance; good/bad examples |
| `rules/04-alerting-triage-soc-soar.md` | Fighting alert fatigue, tuning/suppression with expiry, severity assignment, enrichment, dedup/correlation, runbooks, SOAR + auto-containment guardrails, case management, FP lifecycle, SOC metrics |
| `rules/05-hunting-intel-deception.md` | Hypothesis-driven hunting + the hunt loop, IOC vs IOA/TTP hunting, threat-intel lifecycle + TIP, STIX 2.1/TAXII 2.1, diamond model/kill chain, deception (honeypots/honeytokens/canaries) |
| `rules/06-incident-response-validation.md` | Running IR (NIST SP 800-61r3 / CSF 2.0, PICERL), playbooks, severity classification, containment/eradication/recovery, forensic readiness + chain of custody, blameless PIR, tabletops; validating detections via Atomic Red Team/Caldera/Stratus, purple teaming, regression testing |
| `rules/07-ad-attack-detection.md` | Detecting on-prem Active Directory attacks: DC audit-policy telemetry and the events that matter (4768/4769/4770, 4662, 4624/4625, 5136, 8004, 4886/4887), Kerberoasting (RC4 TGS spikes), AS-REP roasting, DCSync (replication GUIDs on 4662), golden/silver tickets, DCShadow, ADCS abuse (ESC1), NTLM relay, password spraying, RBCD writes (5136); ATT&CK mapping (T1558.x, T1003.006, T1207, T1649) + AD deception (honeytoken SPNs, canary objects). Hardening lives in sota-identity-access rules/07 |

## Top 10 non-negotiables

1. **You can't detect what you don't collect.** The #1 gap is telemetry, not
   rules. Audit log-source coverage against your attack paths before writing a
   single detection.
2. **Detections are code.** Version-controlled, peer-reviewed, CI-tested,
   ATT&CK-mapped, with an owner and an ADS doc. A detection that isn't tested
   isn't a detection — it's a hope.
3. **Every detection is validated against the real technique.** Atomic Red Team
   / Stratus / Caldera proves it fires; a benign baseline proves it stays
   quiet. No merge without both.
4. **Climb the Pyramid of Pain.** Prefer TTP/behavioral logic over hashes/IPs/
   domains. IOCs are a supplement and an enrichment, never the strategy.
5. **Signal-to-noise is the product.** Alert fatigue is the dominant SOC
   failure. Tune aggressively, suppress with *expiry*, and treat a chronically
   ignored alert as a Critical defect.
6. **Every alert has a runbook and an owner.** No actionable signal reaches a
   human without next steps. Wire alerting plumbing via sota-observability
   rules/04; you own the *security* content.
7. **Map coverage to ATT&CK and stare at the gaps.** A Navigator heatmap that
   nobody updates is theater. Coverage drives the next hypothesis.
8. **Behavior-detect, then enrich.** Correlate, deduplicate, and decorate alerts
   with asset/identity/TI context so triage is seconds, not minutes.
9. **An IR plan that's never exercised is fiction.** Tabletop it, keep contacts
   and authority-to-contain current, and run blameless post-incident reviews
   that feed new detections.
10. **Deception is the highest-fidelity signal you own.** A touched honeytoken
    or honeypot has ~zero false positives. Deploy canaries in the paths
    attackers must traverse (see sota-secrets-management rules/04 honeytokens).

Files in this skill

  • SKILL.md10.6 KB
  • rules/01-detection-engineering-discipline.md10.8 KB
  • rules/02-telemetry-siem-data-layer.md8.8 KB
  • rules/03-rule-languages-engines.md10.5 KB
  • rules/04-alerting-triage-soc-soar.md8.8 KB
  • rules/05-hunting-intel-deception.md7.9 KB
  • rules/06-incident-response-validation.md9.8 KB
  • rules/07-ad-attack-detection.md14.9 KB

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.