Purple Teaming
Red Team Finds the Gaps. Purple Team Closes Them — With Your Defenders in the Room.
Red team engagements produce a report. Purple team engagements produce a measurably improved security program. The distinction matters — because a finding documented in a report that your SOC cannot act on, does not know how to detect, or lacks the tool coverage to address is a finding that will be exploited in the next real attack.
Purple teaming executes adversary attack scenarios in direct, real-time collaboration with your blue team — validating detections against live attack activity, tuning alert logic on the spot, and transferring the adversary knowledge your defenders need to close the gap between what your security stack promises and what it delivers.
Why Most Detection Programs Have a Confidence Problem
Organizations invest heavily in SIEM platforms, EDR tools, behavioral analytics, and SOAR automation. Most have no empirical evidence of whether those tools would detect a sophisticated adversary. Alert tuning is based on vendor recommendations, not real attack data. Detection rules are inherited from frameworks, not validated against your specific environment, your specific asset configurations, and the specific TTPs most relevant to your threat profile.
Purple teaming is how you build that evidence — systematically, across every tactic in the MITRE ATT&CK matrix that matters for your organization.
The output of a purple team engagement is not a finding list. It is a detection coverage map showing exactly which adversary techniques your security stack detects, which it misses, and what changes to your rules, tools, or processes would close each gap.
Methodology
ATT&CK Scoping & Scenario Planning
Selection of MITRE ATT&CK techniques relevant to your threat landscape, crown jewel assets, and security stack. Scenario design aligned to the specific adversary groups most likely to target your sector. Prioritization of techniques with the highest detection gap probability based on pre-engagement blue team capability assessment.
Atomic Testing (Technique-by-Technique)
Systematic execution of individual ATT&CK techniques with the blue team observing in real time. For each technique: operator executes the attack, blue team assesses whether a detection fired, log data is reviewed collaboratively, and the detection outcome (detected, detected with delay, missed) is documented.
Detection Tuning (Live)
Where a technique is not detected, the operator and blue team work collaboratively to identify what log source would have caught it, what rule logic would have fired on it, and what configuration change would enable detection — implemented live during the engagement, not scheduled for a future sprint.
Chained Scenario Execution
After atomic testing, full attack chains are executed combining multiple techniques in sequence — validating whether the improved individual detections hold when techniques are chained as a real adversary would chain them.
Measurement & Reporting
Complete MITRE ATT&CK coverage matrix: techniques tested, detection rate, time-to-detect, and response quality score. Prioritized detection engineering backlog. Tool configuration recommendations. Security stack gap analysis.
What We Test
- Initial access techniques (phishing, external exploitation, supply chain)
- Credential access (Kerberoasting, LSASS dumping, credential file access)
- Lateral movement (WMI, PsExec, SMB, WinRM, DCOM)
- Defense evasion (LOLBins, obfuscation, timestomping, log clearing)
- Persistence mechanisms (scheduled tasks, registry run keys, WMI subscriptions)
- Command and control (DNS tunneling, HTTP/S C2 patterns, C2 over legitimate platforms)
- Exfiltration techniques (cloud sync abuse, DNS exfiltration, encrypted transfer)
- AI system attack techniques (where AI security tooling is in scope)
Compliance Alignment
| Framework | Requirement |
|---|---|
| DORA Art. 25 & 26 | ICT security testing and TLPT — purple teaming satisfies advanced testing requirements |
| TIBER-EU | Purple team exercises as validation layer following red team engagements |
| ISO 27001:2022 | A.5.37 — documented operating procedures; detection and response improvement |
| NIS2 Art. 21 | Security monitoring, detection, and incident response capability validation |
| SAMA | Advanced detection capability validation for financial sector security programs |
Deliverables
- MITRE ATT&CK Coverage Heatmap — before and after detection coverage across all techniques tested
- Detection Engineering Backlog — prioritized list of detection rules to create, tune, or retire, with implementation guidance
- Tool Configuration Recommendations — EDR, SIEM, and SOAR-specific tuning recommendations per gap identified
- Atomic Test Results Log — technique-by-technique outcome record with timestamp, detection status, and response quality
- Chained Scenario Narrative — full-chain attack execution outcomes post-tuning
- Executive Summary — detection program maturity assessment with measurable improvement targets
- Technical Report — complete test coverage documentation, findings, and recommendations
- Follow-Up Benchmark Session — optional 30-day follow-up to measure improvement against baseline
Ready to scope this engagement?
Tell us about your environment, regulatory drivers, and timeline. We will align methodology, scope, and evidence requirements before testing begins.