Cybatar Security Hub
Trust Center·Company facts
Security Hub
Menu
Platform Solutions Pricing Industries Use cases Resources Trust Center Company Contact
Client login Start free trial
Threat Intelligence / Methodology
Editorial & technical methodology

Cybatar Threat Intelligence & Threat Hunting Methodology

How Cybatar separates intelligence requirements, observations, indicators, analytical confidence, information exchange, hunting hypotheses, telemetry readiness and investigation outcomes.

Published 2026-08-17Reviewed 2026-08-17

Method principles

Principle 1

Start intelligence work from a decision or question, not from feed volume.

Principle 2

Keep provenance, observations, analysis, confidence and attribution distinguishable so uncertainty remains visible.

Principle 3

Treat indicators as time-bound signals that require context, sightings and review rather than permanent truth.

Principle 4

Separate STIX representation, TAXII transport and Cybatar product capability; verify interoperability before making integration claims.

Principle 5

Start hunts from a bounded hypothesis with explicit scope, telemetry prerequisites and escalation/closure criteria.

Principle 6

Verify telemetry health before interpreting absence of evidence as evidence of absence.

Principle 7

Preserve queries, pivots, observations, limitations and resulting actions so hunts can be reviewed and repeated.

Principle 8

Feed hunt outcomes back into intelligence requirements, detection engineering, exposure management and incident response.

External source notes

NIST SP 800-150Used for goals, sources, sharing scope, rules and effective use of cyber threat information.OASIS STIX 2.1Used for structured representation of cyber threat intelligence.OASIS TAXII 2.1Used for application-layer communication of cyber threat information.MITRE ATT&CKUsed as an external knowledge base of adversary behaviours for detection and hunting hypotheses.

Explicit non-claims

  • Cybatar does not claim NIST, OASIS or MITRE certification or endorsement.
  • Public documentation does not establish native STIX 2.1 or TAXII 2.1 conformance.
  • An IOC match does not by itself prove compromise or attribution.
  • A threat-actor association or confidence label does not remove analytical uncertainty.
  • A completed hunt does not prove the absence of malicious activity.
  • ATT&CK mapping does not prove detection or hunting coverage.
  • Connected telemetry does not prove completeness, retention or analytical usability.

How to use this methodology

Start with a decision or intelligence requirement, preserve provenance and uncertainty, validate environmental relevance, turn material questions into bounded hunt hypotheses, verify telemetry before analysis, preserve reproducible evidence, and feed results into detections, incidents, exposure treatment and future intelligence requirements.