Campaign Tracking

Campaign Tracking

A campaign is a coordinated set of malicious activities carried out by a threat actor against specific targets over a defined period.

Campaign Template

## Campaign: [Campaign ID / Name]

### Overview
| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| **Campaign ID** | CAMP-YYYY-MM-XXX |
| **Name** | [Descriptive name if known] |
| **Status** | Active / Dormant / Concluded |
| **First observed** | YYYY-MM-DD |
| **Last observed** | YYYY-MM-DD |
| **Attribution** | [Actor — with confidence level] |
| **Motivation** | [Espionage / Financial / Destruction / Hacktivism] |

### Timeline
| Date | Event | Source |
|------|-------|--------|
| YYYY-MM-DD | Initial delivery emails sent | Internal telemetry |
| YYYY-MM-DD | First successful compromise | Vendor report (B2) |
| YYYY-MM-DD | Lateral movement detected | SOC alert |
| YYYY-MM-DD | Data exfiltration observed | Network forensics |

### Attribution
[Assessment of who is behind this campaign, with confidence level. Reference threat actor profile if available.]

### Victimology
- **Sectors targeted**: [List]
- **Geographies**: [Countries/regions]
- **Number of known victims**: [Count with confidence]
- **Selection criteria**: [How were targets chosen? Opportunistic vs targeted?]
- **Common characteristics**: [What do victims have in common?]

### Attack Chain (Kill Chain / ATT&CK)
| Phase | Technique (ATT&CK) | Details |
|-------|-------------------|---------|
| Reconnaissance | T1598 Phishing for Information | Targeted LinkedIn messages to identify employees |
| Initial Access | T1566.001 Spearphishing Attachment | Malicious Word doc with macro |
| Execution | T1059.001 PowerShell | Macro downloads PowerShell stager |
| Persistence | T1547.001 Registry Run Keys | Run key added for backdoor |
| C2 | T1071.001 Application Layer Protocol | HTTPS to legitimate cloud service |
| Exfiltration | T1567.002 Exfiltration to Cloud Storage | Data uploaded to attacker-controlled cloud |

### Diamond Model
| Vertex | Details |
|--------|---------|
| **Adversary** | [Threat actor / group — reference profile] |
| **Capability** | [Malware, exploits, tools, techniques used] |
| **Infrastructure** | [C2 servers, staging, delivery infrastructure, domains] |
| **Victim** | [Targeted organisations, sectors, systems] |

**Meta-features:**
- **Direction**: [Adversary-to-Victim / Victim-to-Adversary / Bidirectional]
- **Methodology**: [Attack phases and progression]
- **Resources**: [Level of investment observed]
- **Social-Political**: [Geopolitical context driving the campaign]
- **Technology**: [Technology landscape enabling the campaign]

### IOC Clusters
#### Delivery Infrastructure
| Type | Value | First Seen | Status |
|------|-------|-----------|--------|
| Domain | phishing.example.com | 2026-01-15 | Active |
| IP | 203.0.113.42 | 2026-01-15 | Active |

#### C2 Infrastructure
| Type | Value | First Seen | Status |
|------|-------|-----------|--------|
| Domain | c2.badactor.net | 2026-01-20 | Active |
| IP | 198.51.100.10 | 2026-01-20 | Active |

#### Malware
| Hash (SHA-256) | Name | Type | First Seen |
|----------------|------|------|-----------|
| abc123... | loader.dll | Loader | 2026-01-15 |

### TTP Evolution During Campaign
[How have the attackers adapted? Changed tools? Modified techniques? Responded to detection?]

### Detection Guidance
[Reference to SIGMA/YARA/KQL rules created for this campaign. Link to data/detection-rules/.]

### Intelligence Gaps
[What we still don't know about this campaign]

### Sources
| Date | Source | Reliability | Key Finding |
|------|--------|-------------|-------------|

Campaign Linking

Campaigns may be related. Document relationships:

• Same infrastructure: Shared C2, shared registrant
• Same tooling: Same malware family or builder
• Same TTPs: Identical techniques across campaigns
• Same victimology: Same sector/geography targeting
• Temporal overlap: Concurrent operations

Campaign Lifecycle Management

1. Detection: Initial indicators or vendor report triggers campaign tracking
2. Active tracking: Continuous collection, IOC updates, TTP documentation
3. Analysis: Attribution, Diamond Model mapping, impact assessment
4. Reporting: Campaign report produced per intelligence-writing templates
5. Conclusion: Campaign ends (dormant or concluded), move to historical
6. Knowledge cell update: Feed findings into relevant knowledge cell

Related skills

• Build the IOC cluster — /indicator-pivoting (multi-hop graph walk), /ioc-enrichment-workflow (bulk enrichment of raw IOCs)
• Per-indicator first-hop investigation — /ip-investigation, /domain-investigation, /hash-investigation, /url-investigation
• Ransomware-group campaigns — /lookup-ransomwarelive group-profile <name> returns the group's documented TTPs, leak-site infrastructure, and per-group IOC + YARA dumps; pair with /ransomware-ecosystem knowledge cell
• Publish the campaign as a sharable artefact — /lookup-misp create-event writes the cluster into your MISP instance; /stix-bundle produces the STIX 2.1 representation; /lookup-opencti upload-stix imports that bundle into your OpenCTI knowledge base (or create-relationship to link indicators to an existing campaign entity); /lookup-liberty91 ingest files the campaign write-up as a report in Liberty91, where it is enriched and matched into a Threat Event for your account (metered — confirm with the user first)
• Seed and update the timeline from occurrences — /lookup-liberty91 threat-events --technique <Txxxx> --target-sector <s> --occurred-after <date> for candidate incidents, and entity threat-actors <id> --section threat-events once the actor is attributed. Each occurrence is already deduplicated across its reporting, so the timeline doesn't need re-collapsing; carry its verification stage and credibility band into the campaign record rather than restating them as your own judgement
• Actor attribution — /threat-actor-profiling consumes the campaign output to build / update an actor profile
• Apply rigor to the campaign report — /score-source, /apply-tlp, /confidence-language, /likelihood-language, /intelligence-writing