# Red Team Engagement Report Template ## Document Control | Field | Value | |---|---| | Engagement ID | RT-2025-XXX | | Client Name | [Organization Name] | | Report Date | YYYY-MM-DD | | Classification | CONFIDENTIAL | | Report Version | 1.0 | | Lead Operator | [Name] | | Reviewed By | [Name] | --- ## 1. Executive Summary ### 1.1 Engagement Overview [Organization Name] engaged [Red Team Company] to conduct a full-scope red team assessment from [start date] to [end date]. The engagement simulated the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) of [Threat Actor], targeting [objectives]. ### 1.2 Key Findings Summary | # | Finding | Severity | Detected | |---|---|---|---| | 1 | [Finding Title] | Critical | No | | 2 | [Finding Title] | High | Yes | | 3 | [Finding Title] | High | No | | 4 | [Finding Title] | Medium | Yes | ### 1.3 Overall Risk Rating **[CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW]** The red team achieved [X of Y] defined objectives, with [Z]% of activities detected by the security operations center. Critical gaps were identified in [area 1], [area 2], and [area 3]. ### 1.4 Metrics at a Glance | Metric | Value | |---|---| | Total TTPs Executed | XX | | Detection Rate | XX% | | Mean Time to Detect | XX hours | | Objectives Achieved | X/Y | | Dwell Time (Undetected) | XX days | | Unique Hosts Compromised | XX | | Credentials Harvested | XX | --- ## 2. Scope and Rules of Engagement ### 2.1 Engagement Scope **In-Scope:** - Network ranges: [CIDR ranges] - Domains: [domains] - Physical locations: [if applicable] - Personnel: [if social engineering in scope] **Out-of-Scope:** - [Systems/networks excluded] - [Actions prohibited] ### 2.2 Rules of Engagement - Authorization document reference: [RoE document ID] - Approved hours of operation: [hours] - Emergency contact: [name, phone] - Deconfliction process: [description] ### 2.3 Threat Profile **Emulated Adversary:** [Threat Actor Name] - MITRE ATT&CK Group: [Group ID] - Known Targets: [industries/regions] - Typical TTPs: [summary of techniques] --- ## 3. Attack Narrative ### 3.1 Engagement Timeline ``` Day 1-5: Reconnaissance and OSINT Day 6-8: Infrastructure setup and payload development Day 9-12: Initial access attempts Day 13-20: Post-exploitation, lateral movement, persistence Day 21-25: Objective pursuit and data exfiltration Day 26-28: Cleanup and evidence collection ``` ### 3.2 Phase 1: Reconnaissance **Objective:** Identify attack surface and high-value targets | Action | Technique | Result | |---|---|---| | Subdomain enumeration | T1593 | Found XX subdomains | | Employee enumeration | T1589.002 | Identified XX employees | | Credential search | T1589.001 | Found XX breached credentials | **Key Discoveries:** - [Discovery 1 with evidence] - [Discovery 2 with evidence] ### 3.3 Phase 2: Initial Access **Objective:** Establish initial foothold on target network **Vector Used:** [T1566.001 Spearphishing / T1190 Exploit / etc.] **Detailed Walkthrough:** 1. [Step 1 with screenshot reference] 2. [Step 2 with screenshot reference] 3. [Step 3 with screenshot reference] **Detection Status:** [Detected/Undetected] by [source] at [time] ### 3.4 Phase 3: Post-Exploitation **Objective:** Escalate privileges and establish persistence | Action | Technique | Host | Result | Detected | |---|---|---|---|---| | Credential dump | T1003.001 | WS-XXX | Obtained X creds | Yes/No | | Kerberoasting | T1558.003 | DC01 | Cracked X SPNs | Yes/No | | Scheduled task | T1053.005 | WS-XXX | Persistence set | Yes/No | ### 3.5 Phase 4: Lateral Movement **Objective:** Move toward crown jewel systems **Attack Path:** ``` Initial Foothold (WS-042) └── Credential Reuse (T1078) └── File Server (FS01) via PsExec (T1021.002) └── Database Server (DB01) via RDP (T1021.001) └── Domain Controller (DC01) via DCSync (T1003.006) ``` ### 3.6 Phase 5: Objective Achievement | Objective | Status | Evidence | |---|---|---| | Domain Admin Access | Achieved | DCSync of krbtgt hash | | PII Data Exfiltration | Achieved | 50MB exfiled over C2 | | SCADA Network Access | Not Achieved | Network segmentation prevented access | --- ## 4. MITRE ATT&CK Mapping ### 4.1 Technique Heat Map [Insert ATT&CK Navigator layer screenshot] Navigator JSON file: `engagement_navigator.json` ### 4.2 Techniques Used | Technique ID | Technique Name | Tactic | Used | Detected | |---|---|---|---|---| | T1566.001 | Spearphishing Attachment | Initial Access | Yes | Yes | | T1059.001 | PowerShell | Execution | Yes | No | | T1003.001 | LSASS Memory | Credential Access | Yes | Yes | | T1558.003 | Kerberoasting | Credential Access | Yes | No | | T1021.002 | SMB Admin Shares | Lateral Movement | Yes | No | | T1003.006 | DCSync | Credential Access | Yes | Yes | | T1041 | Exfil Over C2 Channel | Exfiltration | Yes | No | --- ## 5. Findings ### Finding 1: [Title] | Field | Value | |---|---| | Severity | Critical | | CVSS Score | 9.8 | | Affected Systems | [list] | | MITRE ATT&CK | [technique ID] | **Description:** [Detailed description of the vulnerability or gap] **Evidence:** [Screenshots, logs, proof of exploitation] **Impact:** [Business impact assessment] **Recommendation:** [Specific remediation steps] --- ## 6. Detection Gap Analysis ### 6.1 Summary | Category | Count | Percentage | |---|---|---| | Actions Detected | X | XX% | | Actions Undetected | X | XX% | | Techniques with Zero Coverage | X | - | ### 6.2 Gaps by Tactic | Tactic | Actions | Detected | Gap | |---|---|---|---| | Initial Access | X | X | XX% | | Execution | X | X | XX% | | Persistence | X | X | XX% | | Credential Access | X | X | XX% | | Lateral Movement | X | X | XX% | | Exfiltration | X | X | XX% | ### 6.3 Priority Detection Rules Needed 1. **[Detection Rule Name]** - Detect [technique] via [data source] 2. **[Detection Rule Name]** - Detect [technique] via [data source] 3. **[Detection Rule Name]** - Detect [technique] via [data source] --- ## 7. Recommendations ### 7.1 Immediate (0-30 days) 1. [Critical remediation action] 2. [Critical remediation action] ### 7.2 Short-Term (30-90 days) 1. [High-priority improvement] 2. [High-priority improvement] ### 7.3 Long-Term (90-180 days) 1. [Strategic improvement] 2. [Strategic improvement] --- ## 8. Appendices ### Appendix A: Tools Used | Tool | Purpose | Version | |---|---|---| | Havoc | C2 Framework | 0.7 | | Impacket | AD Attacks | 0.11.0 | | Rubeus | Kerberos Attacks | 2.3.0 | | BloodHound | AD Reconnaissance | 4.3 | ### Appendix B: IOCs for Deconfliction | Type | Value | Context | |---|---|---| | IP | X.X.X.X | C2 Server | | Domain | c2.example.com | C2 Domain | | Hash | [SHA256] | Payload | | User-Agent | [string] | C2 Callback | ### Appendix C: Cleanup Confirmation - [ ] All implants removed - [ ] All persistence mechanisms removed - [ ] All created accounts deleted - [ ] All modified configurations restored - [ ] Infrastructure decommissioned