Building Threat Scenarios for Continuous Automated Red Teaming Operations

A Continuous Automated Red Teaming (CART) program is only as strong as the threat scenarios it runs. Automation ensures persistent testing, but the quality, relevance, and realism of scenarios determine how well an organization can withstand actual cyberattacks.

With sophisticated campaigns—from targeted ransomware to large-scale data breaches—becoming more frequent, security leaders can’t rely on generic test cases. Scenarios must mirror real adversary tactics, leverage live cyber threat intelligence, and align with frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK for maximum coverage.

Why Threat Scenario Design Is Crucial for CART

Without high-quality scenarios:

• Critical vulnerabilities like race condition exploits or SSL protocol flaws can be missed.

• Blue team defenses may be unprepared for multi-vector, chained intrusions.

• Key exposure paths to sensitive data may remain undetected.
  

With strong scenario design:

• Attack surface discovery through EASM and dark web intelligence becomes continuous.

• Full kill chain simulations from reconnaissance to exfiltration are executed.

• Remediation cycles accelerate, with findings integrated directly into CISO dashboards and ticketing systems.
  

Step 1: Intelligence Gathering

Effective scenarios start with mapping the environment and gathering intelligence:

• Shodan & Google Dork searches for exposed assets (e.g., inurl: git, credential leaks).

• Subdomain enumeration to uncover hidden infrastructure.

• Dark web monitoring for leaked credentials, documents, and access tokens.

• 
  

Example: A BFSI institution used API key discovery tools to detect exposed keys in public repositories triggering a payment fraud simulation via a compromised gateway API.

Step 2: Threat Actor Profiling

Modeling real adversaries increases relevance:

• Nation-state groups → Simulate cloud and telecom protocol exploitation.

• Cybercriminal gangs → Focus on financial fraud and ransomware payloads.

• Hacktivists → Simulate defacement, DNS hijacking, or data leaks.
  

Step 3: Building the Kill Chain

Aquila I’s CART scenarios follow a structured kill chain:

1. Reconnaissance – Asset mapping via EASM and open-source tools.

2. Weaponization – Crafting payloads or malicious scripts.

3. Delivery – Email phishing, web injection, or network infiltration.

4. Exploitation – Trigger vulnerabilities like race conditions, deserialization flaws, or RPC protocol weaknesses.

5. Command & Control – Simulate persistence and lateral movement without impacting production systems.
   

Step 4: MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Each action in the scenario is mapped to MITRE ATT&CK tactics such as Initial Access, Execution, and Exfiltration, ensuring:

• Complete coverage of adversary techniques.

• Consistent reporting for SOC teams and auditors.
  

Step 5: Blending Automation and Manual Insight

While automation powers scale, certain scenarios require expert human oversight:

• Simulating zero-day exploitation in cloud-based RPC services.

• Bypassing complex enterprise authentication layers.

• Chaining multiple vulnerabilities into a single multi-stage attack.
  

Step 6: Validating Blue Team Readiness

Scenarios measure more than vulnerability presence—they test:

• Detection Speed – How quickly an incident is identified.

• Response Quality – Correctness and efficiency of containment measures.

• Policy Compliance – Whether identity and access controls are enforced.
  

Tools for Scenario Development

• Reconnaissance: Nmap, Amass, custom reconnaissance scripts.

• Exploitation: Metasploit, Burp Suite, Cobalt Strike.

• Vulnerability Validation: Qualys, Nessus, OpenVAS.

• C2 Simulation: Caldera, Infection Monkey.

  
  

Real-World BFSI Example

Objective: Test phishing resilience leading to financial fraud.

• Recon: Gather employee email addresses via OSINT.

• Weaponization: Craft malicious PDF exploiting a deserialization flaw.

• Delivery: Send through a spoofed secure email gateway.

• Exploitation: Trigger RCE payload to gain payment system access.

• Impact: Simulate unauthorized fund transfers via API compromise.
  

Best Practices for Threat Scenario Design

• Update Monthly based on live threat intelligence.

• Diversify Attack Vectors—blend application, network, and human-targeted exploits.

• Include Insider Threat Simulation to mimic privilege misuse.

• Test the Entire Response Cycle—from detection to remediation validation.

• 
  

The Future of CART Scenario Building

• AI-generated scenarios based on historical breach patterns.

• Automated reconnaissance for emerging IoT and cloud ecosystems.

• Direct compliance audit integration for regulatory mapping.
  

Conclusion

CART scenario design is about quality over quantity—focusing on realism, relevance, and measurable impact. By combining live intelligence, advanced tooling, and MITRE ATT&CK alignment, Aquila I ensures your organization is not just testing security, but building resilience.

Strengthen your defenses with Aquila I’s advanced CART operations. Request a Custom Threat Scenario Assessment Today