hack3rs.ca network-security

/learning/incident-response-playbooks-framework-functions :: module-10

student@hack3rs:~/learning$ open incident-response-playbooks-framework-functions

Incident Response Playbooks Aligned to Recognized Cybersecurity Framework Functions

Design incident response playbooks that map to common framework functions (identify, protect, detect, respond, recover) while staying practical for real analysts and operators.

A playbook is only useful if it helps people make good decisions under stress. Aligning playbooks to a recognized framework improves coverage and governance, but the content still has to be operationally actionable.

learning-objectives

$Break response work into pre-incident preparation, triage, containment, eradication, recovery, and improvement phases.
$Write role-specific steps with decision points and escalation triggers.
$Define evidence handling and communication expectations in each playbook.
$Test playbooks through tabletop and technical exercises.

example-dataflow-and-observation-paths

Use these example dataflows to trace how activity moves through systems and where a defender can observe evidence. This is how learners move from memorizing terms to thinking like investigators.

$Detection trigger -> triage playbook invoked -> containment decision -> evidence collection -> eradication/recovery tasks -> post-incident review updates playbook and controls.
$Governance/approval path: responder identifies threshold -> escalates to lead -> legal/comms/leadership engaged if impact criteria met -> actions tracked in case timeline.
$Exercise path: tabletop inject -> decision point -> documented blocker -> backlog item -> playbook revision -> retest.

baseline-normal-before-debugging

$Responders know where playbooks live and can execute first steps without delay.
$Escalation triggers and approvals are documented and exercised.
$Evidence collection steps are consistent across incidents of the same type.

Expert tip: Baseline normal behavior before writing detections or escalating anomalies. Most tuning and triage errors come from skipping this step.

concept-breakdown-and-mastery

1. Playbook Structure and Scope

$ core idea: Create playbooks for recurring incident types (for example phishing compromise, malware beaconing, suspicious admin login, data exfiltration concern, DDoS impact). Each playbook should define scope, assumptions, roles, and entry criteria.

$ defender angle: Separate strategic policy from operational steps. The policy defines authority and expectations; the playbook defines what responders do in sequence during an event.

$ prove understanding: Break response work into pre-incident preparation, triage, containment, eradication, recovery, and improvement phases.

2. Mapping to Framework Functions Without Becoming Abstract

$ core idea: Framework functions help ensure coverage: Identify (assets and ownership), Protect (controls in place), Detect (triggers and telemetry), Respond (containment and communication), and Recover (service restoration and lessons learned).

$ defender angle: In practice, the responder needs concrete steps, commands, owners, and evidence sources. Map each step to a function in documentation, but keep the on-call version short and action-oriented.

$ prove understanding: Write role-specific steps with decision points and escalation triggers.

3. Testing, Maintenance, and Drift Control

$ core idea: Playbooks decay as environments change. Review them after incidents, major architecture changes, and scheduled exercises. Retire or merge stale playbooks instead of letting them accumulate.

$ defender angle: Tabletops validate roles and decision paths; technical drills validate tooling, permissions, and data access. You need both to avoid false confidence.

$ prove understanding: Define evidence handling and communication expectations in each playbook.

deep-dive-notes-expanded

Work through the sections in order. For each section, learn the theory, identify normal behavior, identify failure patterns, then validate with packet/log/CLI evidence.

1. Playbook Structure and Scope

Create playbooks for recurring incident types (for example phishing compromise, malware beaconing, suspicious admin login, data exfiltration concern, DDoS impact). Each playbook should define scope, assumptions, roles, and entry criteria.

Separate strategic policy from operational steps. The policy defines authority and expectations; the playbook defines what responders do in sequence during an event.

Use clear decision points such as “escalate if domain controller involved,” “contain if active beaconing persists,” or “invoke legal/comms if customer data may be affected.”

Normal Behavior

Responders know where playbooks live and can execute first steps without delay.

Failure / Abuse Pattern

Playbooks are too abstract and responders improvise under pressure.

Evidence To Collect

Break response work into pre-incident preparation, triage, containment, eradication, recovery, and improvement phases.

2. Mapping to Framework Functions Without Becoming Abstract

Framework functions help ensure coverage: Identify (assets and ownership), Protect (controls in place), Detect (triggers and telemetry), Respond (containment and communication), and Recover (service restoration and lessons learned).

In practice, the responder needs concrete steps, commands, owners, and evidence sources. Map each step to a function in documentation, but keep the on-call version short and action-oriented.

A good playbook includes what to collect, who to notify, what to avoid doing, and when to stop and ask for approval.

Normal Behavior

Escalation triggers and approvals are documented and exercised.

Failure / Abuse Pattern

Escalation thresholds are unclear, causing delayed containment or overreaction.

Evidence To Collect

Write role-specific steps with decision points and escalation triggers.

3. Testing, Maintenance, and Drift Control

Playbooks decay as environments change. Review them after incidents, major architecture changes, and scheduled exercises. Retire or merge stale playbooks instead of letting them accumulate.

Tabletops validate roles and decision paths; technical drills validate tooling, permissions, and data access. You need both to avoid false confidence.

Capture timing and blockers during exercises (missing logs, access issues, unclear ownership, approvals). Those blockers become hardening and process backlog items.

Normal Behavior

Evidence collection steps are consistent across incidents of the same type.

Failure / Abuse Pattern

Exercises are skipped, so access/tooling blockers appear during real incidents.

Evidence To Collect

Define evidence handling and communication expectations in each playbook.

terminal-walkthroughs-with-example-output

These walkthroughs show representative commands plus example output so learners know what success and useful evidence look like. Treat the output as a pattern guide, not a fixed transcript.

Create A Playbook Skeleton

Beginner

Command

mkdir -p playbooks

Example Output

# command executed in lab
# review output for expected fields, errors, and anomalies

$ why this matters: Use this step to validate create a playbook skeleton before moving on to more advanced commands in the same block. Focus on interpreting the output, not just running the command.

Tabletop Prep Files

Intermediate

Command

mkdir -p tabletop

Example Output

# command executed in lab
# review output for expected fields, errors, and anomalies

$ why this matters: Use this step to validate tabletop prep files before moving on to more advanced commands in the same block. Focus on interpreting the output, not just running the command.

Evidence Collection Folders

Advanced

Command

mkdir -p incidents/INC-001/{logs,pcaps,notes,exports}

Example Output

# command executed in lab
# review output for expected fields, errors, and anomalies

$ why this matters: Use this step to validate evidence collection folders before moving on to more advanced commands in the same block. Focus on interpreting the output, not just running the command.

cli-labs-and-workflow

Run these commands only in environments you own or are explicitly authorized to test. Use a lab VM, sandbox network, or approved internal test segment for practice.

Create A Playbook Skeleton

Beginner

mkdir -p playbooks
cat > playbooks/phishing-account-compromise.md <<'MD'\n# Phishing Account Compromise\n## Trigger Criteria\n## Triage Steps\n## Containment Steps\n## Recovery Steps\n## Communications\n## Lessons Learned\nMD

Run in a lab or authorized environment. Record what fields change when you alter the test conditions.

Tabletop Prep Files

Intermediate

mkdir -p tabletop
printf 'Scenario:\nInjects:\nDecisions:\nBlockers:\nActions:\n' > tabletop/session-01.txt
nano tabletop/session-01.txt

Run in a lab or authorized environment. Record what fields change when you alter the test conditions.

Evidence Collection Folders

Advanced

mkdir -p incidents/INC-001/{logs,pcaps,notes,exports}
tree incidents/INC-001 || ls -R incidents/INC-001

Run in a lab or authorized environment. Record what fields change when you alter the test conditions.

expert-mode-study-loop

$Explain the concept in plain language without reading notes.
$Show how to validate the concept with logs, packets, or commands.
$Name at least one common failure mode and how to detect it.
$Document what 'normal' looks like before testing edge cases.

Progress marker: You are ready to move on when you can explain the topic, run the commands, and interpret the output without guessing.

knowledge-check-and-answer-key

Try answering these from memory before looking at the hints. These questions are designed to test understanding of concepts, dataflow, and evidence collection.

1. Playbook Structure and Scope

Questions

?How would you explain "Playbook Structure and Scope" to a new defender in plain language?
?What does normal behavior look like for playbook structure and scope in your lab or environment?
?Which logs, packets, or commands would you use to validate playbook structure and scope?
?What failure mode or attacker abuse pattern matters most for playbook structure and scope?

Show answer key / hints

Answer Key / Hints

#Break response work into pre-incident preparation, triage, containment, eradication, recovery, and improvement phases.
#Responders know where playbooks live and can execute first steps without delay.
#mkdir -p playbooks
#Playbooks are too abstract and responders improvise under pressure.

2. Mapping to Framework Functions Without Becoming Abstract

Questions

?How would you explain "Mapping to Framework Functions Without Becoming Abstract" to a new defender in plain language?
?What does normal behavior look like for mapping to framework functions without becoming abstract in your lab or environment?
?Which logs, packets, or commands would you use to validate mapping to framework functions without becoming abstract?
?What failure mode or attacker abuse pattern matters most for mapping to framework functions without becoming abstract?

Show answer key / hints

Answer Key / Hints

#Write role-specific steps with decision points and escalation triggers.
#Escalation triggers and approvals are documented and exercised.
#mkdir -p tabletop
#Escalation thresholds are unclear, causing delayed containment or overreaction.

3. Testing, Maintenance, and Drift Control

Questions

?How would you explain "Testing, Maintenance, and Drift Control" to a new defender in plain language?
?What does normal behavior look like for testing, maintenance, and drift control in your lab or environment?
?Which logs, packets, or commands would you use to validate testing, maintenance, and drift control?
?What failure mode or attacker abuse pattern matters most for testing, maintenance, and drift control?

Show answer key / hints

Answer Key / Hints

#Define evidence handling and communication expectations in each playbook.
#Evidence collection steps are consistent across incidents of the same type.
#mkdir -p incidents/INC-001/{logs,pcaps,notes,exports}
#Exercises are skipped, so access/tooling blockers appear during real incidents.

lab-answer-key-expected-findings

Use this as a baseline answer key for labs and walkthroughs. Replace these with environment-specific observations as you practice in real or simulated networks.

Expected Normal Findings

+Responders know where playbooks live and can execute first steps without delay.
+Escalation triggers and approvals are documented and exercised.
+Evidence collection steps are consistent across incidents of the same type.

Expected Failure / Anomaly Clues

!Playbooks are too abstract and responders improvise under pressure.
!Escalation thresholds are unclear, causing delayed containment or overreaction.
!Exercises are skipped, so access/tooling blockers appear during real incidents.

hands-on-labs

$Write a phishing-account-compromise playbook with triage, containment, recovery, and lessons-learned sections.
$Map the playbook steps to framework functions for governance review.
$Run a tabletop using the playbook and record blockers and ambiguities.

common-pitfalls

$Playbooks that are too generic to execute under stress.
$No owner for maintaining playbook changes after incidents.
$No testing, so hidden access or data dependencies appear only during real incidents.

tools-and-references

completion-outputs

# A standardized playbook template
# At least one tested incident playbook
# A playbook maintenance and review cadence

<- previous page Exploit-Informed Remediation and Asset Criticality Tagging -> next page Threat-Informed Defense Using ATT&CK-Style Technique Mapping

learning-path-position

Response & Improvement / Weeks 9-10 · Module 10 of 12