Cyber Threat Intelligence now plays a central role in cybersecurity strategies. Faced with increasingly targeted threats, organisations must move beyond a purely reactive stance and adopt proactive security approaches.
In this article, we outline the principles, objectives and how threat intelligence works. We discuss the implementation of a cyber threat intelligence approach, the selection of sources, the analysis of relevant information and its use in security operations.
Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) is an approach that enables a better understanding of the cyber threats likely to affect an organisation. It relies on the analysis of information from various sources to help make better decisions regarding security and risk management.
CTI is not simply about accumulating data. It transforms scattered signals into actionable insights that help organisations understand who is attacking, why, how, and with what impact.
Threat Intelligence therefore helps organisations anticipate attacks and prioritise their defences before an incident occurs. It enables a shift from a primarily reactive stance to risk management based on a genuine understanding of the threat.
Threat Intelligence is divided into several complementary levels. Each level addresses different needs depending on the target audience, the level of detail required and the relevant timeframe. This allows the intelligence to be tailored to both security teams and executives.
Tactical Threat Intelligence focuses on the tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) used by attackers. It helps to understand how an attack is carried out and what measures to put in place to protect against it.
It is particularly useful for SOC (Security Operations Centre) teams, security managers and IT teams responsible for security controls. It frequently draws on frameworks such as MITRE ATT&CK.
Operational Threat Intelligence aims to identify the threats most likely to target an organisation in the short to medium term. It focuses on active groups, ongoing campaigns, exploited vulnerabilities and assets that may be targeted.
It helps to improve detection, threat hunting, vulnerability management and incident preparedness.
Strategic Threat Intelligence provides a comprehensive overview of the threat landscape. It analyses sector-specific trends, geopolitical developments, regulatory changes and their potential implications for the business.
It is primarily used for risk management, budgetary decisions, long-term planning and executive decision-making.
Technical Threat Intelligence is based on the detailed analysis of technical elements related to an attack. It includes indicators of compromise (IoCs), malware, scripts, malicious infrastructure and exploitation mechanisms.
It supports detection, incident response and investigation activities. It is also one of the easiest types of intelligence to automate.
These different levels do not operate individually. They complement one another and link the information gathered to strategic decisions.
The distinction between tactical intelligence and technical intelligence is often a source of confusion. The former seeks primarily to understand attack methods in order to adapt defences. The latter focuses more on the technical analysis of the traces left by attackers to aid detection and investigation.
Investing in Threat Intelligence primarily helps to reduce the impact of cyberattacks. By detecting certain threats earlier and anticipating likely attacks, an organisation can limit the financial, operational and legal consequences of a major incident.
Threat Intelligence is also an effective tool for prioritising risks. By identifying the most credible threats to a given sector or context, it helps to focus security resources where they are most needed.
It also helps align security with the company’s strategy. Executives have tangible data to guide investments, adjust third-party management or strengthen certain detection and response capabilities.
Finally, Threat Intelligence contributes directly to regulatory compliance. Frameworks such as NIS2, DORA, ISO 27001 and the GDPR require proactive and documented management of cyber risks.
It also helps protect the company’s reputation by detecting brand impersonation, targeted phishing campaigns or the resale of sensitive information at an early stage, before a crisis arises.
This initial phase involves defining the mission objectives and intelligence requirements. It enables the identification of critical assets requiring protection, the prioritisation of risks, and the clarification of the questions that Threat Intelligence must address.
This stage aims to gather data from internal and external sources.
Internal sources may include SIEM logs, EDR data, network telemetry or application logs. External sources may include OSINT, commercial feeds, government reports, sector-specific ISACs (Information Sharing and Analysis Centres) or dark web forums.
The aim is to collect relevant signals relating to threats that could affect the organisation.
The data collected is often heterogeneous. It must therefore be sorted, standardised, deduplicated and enriched in order to be usable.
Automated tools can speed up this process and improve the quality of the retained indicators.
Analysis involves transforming processed data into information that is useful for security purposes.
Auditors look for trends, suspicious behaviour, links between events or weak signals. They then assess the potential impact on the organisation and cross-reference these findings with the tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) used by attackers.
The intelligence generated must then be shared with the right people, in a suitable format.
This may take the form of reports, dashboards for the SOC, or alerts. The aim is to make the information actionable as quickly as possible.
Data collection is one of the cornerstones of Cyber Threat Intelligence. It involves gathering data from internal and external sources to inform threat analysis.
The aim is not to collect everything, but to gather information that is genuinely useful to the organisation. Each source must add value depending on the context, the sector of activity and the identified risks.
Cross-referencing multiple sources enables the detection of weak signals, the earlier identification of certain threats and the production of more reliable intelligence.
Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) encompasses information that is publicly available without the need for privileged access. These sources can provide useful insights into emerging threats, exploited vulnerabilities or an organisation’s digital exposure.
The sources utilised include specialist media, cybersecurity blogs, CERT reports, professional forums and certain community platforms.
Added to this is SOCMINT (Social Media Intelligence), which involves monitoring social media to identify publicly available information (roles held, technologies used, ongoing projects or details that could facilitate targeted attacks).
On a technical level, OSINT relies on several well-known methods such as advanced search queries (e.g. Google Dorks), consulting public vulnerability databases, DNS analysis, Whois searches and mapping exposed infrastructure.
The aim is not to accumulate vast amounts of data, but to obtain a clear and actionable overview of the organisation’s digital footprint.
Monitoring the deep web and the dark web provides access to unindexed areas often used by malicious actors to exchange information, sell access credentials or prepare attacks.
This includes, in particular, clandestine forums, criminal marketplaces and platforms distributing leaked data.
The information sought may include compromised credentials, resold databases, VPN or RDP access for sale, webshells, or discussions explicitly mentioning a company or its partners.
This data can sometimes help detect a breach before it is identified internally or anticipate an attack in the making.
When integrated into a structured Cyber Threat Intelligence approach, this monitoring significantly enhances the ability to anticipate threats. It improves detection via IoCs (Indicators of Compromise), as well as understanding the intentions, methods and capabilities of attackers.
External intelligence feeds provide structured, rapidly updated data on threats observed at scale.
They primarily disseminate indicators of compromise, ranging from phishing domains and malicious IP addresses to file hashes and signatures linked to active campaigns. These feeds can be integrated into security tools such as SIEM, SOAR, EDR or XDR to improve automated detection.
Internal data remains essential, however. Logs from firewalls, proxies, EDR, servers or applications enable global threats to be cross-referenced against the information system.
This cross-referencing is essential for transforming a generic signal into a contextualised and actionable alert.
Standard exchange formats make it easier to share and integrate this intelligence into detection and response tools. This facilitates automation and the flow of information between security solutions.
The value of Threat Intelligence does not depend on the volume of data collected, but on its relevance to the organisation. Accumulating information without first filtering it quickly leads to information overload, slows down analysts and reduces the quality of the intelligence produced.
Prioritisation begins with an analysis of the threats that are genuinely relevant to the company’s geographical location and sector of activity. An organisation operating in France or Europe does not face the same actors, regulatory constraints or infrastructure as a company focused on other regions. The sources used must therefore reflect this reality.
The sector of activity is just as important. Attacks targeting the financial sector often differ from those observed in healthcare, manufacturing or digital services. The techniques employed, the assets sought and the expected impacts vary depending on the sector.
Access to specialist communities, such as sector-specific information-sharing centres, also enables organisations to obtain more targeted and directly useful intelligence. These exchanges between organisations facing similar risks enhance the relevance of Threat Intelligence.
Where available, national or sector-specific threat reports also provide a solid foundation. They offer a clear overview of the dominant risks and help to tailor intelligence gathering.
The quality of a source depends on several criteria: its reliability, how up-to-date it is, and the level of context provided. Cross-referencing information from several independent sources helps to increase confidence and minimise errors. Conversely, an isolated or opaque source should be used with caution.
Reducing noise is a major challenge. Mature programmes combine automation, filtering rules and human analysis to limit false positives. Given the rapid obsolescence of IoCs, indicators must also be updated regularly.
Finally, raw data has little value without enrichment. A good source does not merely provide an IP address or a hash. It specifies the associated modus operandi, the relevant TTPs and the potential impacts. A feedback loop with the user teams then allows the sources to be continuously adjusted as needed.
Once the sources have been collected and selected, the raw data must be transformed into useful information. This analysis phase involves interpreting the signals, organising them and drawing actionable conclusions to guide defence and security decisions.
Identifying advanced persistent threat (APT) groups is a cornerstone of Threat Intelligence. It relies on monitoring known groups, their past campaigns and techniques that have already been observed.
Profiling is not limited to a group’s name. It also aims to understand its motivations (espionage, financial gain, etc.). It also helps to identify the sectors targeted and the methods favoured.
Understanding their modus operandi involves analysing the infrastructure used, command-and-control servers, the malware employed, and certain recurring technical signatures.
This analysis enables us to anticipate future actions, better prioritise defences, and construct realistic scenarios for Red Team or TLPT exercises based on credible threats.
The MITRE ATT&CK framework is widely used to categorise attackers’ TTPs. Each observed action can be linked to a specific technique, from initial access through to data exfiltration.
This mapping helps identify weaknesses in existing controls and prioritise corrective actions based on the actual risk to the organisation.
MITRE ATT&CK also facilitates communication between analysts, Red Teams, SOCs and technical teams by providing a common language.
Cyber Threat Intelligence truly comes into its own when it moves beyond theoretical analysis and is integrated into security operations. It is no longer simply a matter of understanding threats, but of turning that knowledge into action, whether that means enhancing detection, guiding incident responses, or informing the prioritisation of patches and defences.
This section explores how to leverage intelligence to generate a real impact on the organisation’s security and resilience.
Cyber Threat Intelligence is most effective when integrated into existing security operations. Intelligence feeds—whether from open sources, the dark web, commercial feeds or internal telemetry—must automatically feed into SIEM and SOAR systems to enable real-time event correlation and rapid incident response.
This integration transforms technical data into actionable, contextualised alerts, facilitating the automatic orchestration of defensive measures, such as blocking suspicious IP addresses or domains before an intrusion occurs.
Reducing noise is a major challenge. An effective Cyber Threat Intelligence programme aims to keep the false positive rate below 5%, ensuring that analysts focus their attention on real threats and freeing up time for in-depth investigations.
This proactive approach also extends to Threat Hunting, where Cyber Threat Intelligence serves as a compass to identify latent infections, detect communications to command-and-control servers, or reveal lateral movement based on the known TTPs of targeted attackers.
Integration thus ensures a direct transition from information to action, strengthening detection and response without relying exclusively on passive alert monitoring.
Cyber Threat Intelligence delivers tangible benefits that go far beyond mere prevention. It enables organisations to prioritise patches in the face of a large annual volume of vulnerabilities by targeting those actively exploited by APT groups or ransomware.
To protect the brand, Cyber Threat Intelligence monitors the digital ecosystem and the dark web to detect typosquatting, phishing campaigns impersonating the company, and attempts to impersonate senior executives. This proactive monitoring helps prevent incidents before they reach customers or partners.
Finally, Cyber Threat Intelligence plays a strategic and decision-making role. It transforms complex technical data into concise, actionable reports for senior management, enabling the justification of investments and demonstrating a reduction in operational and financial risk.
The company thus gains in efficiency, responsiveness and credibility with stakeholders and regulators, turning intelligence into a competitive advantage.
In an advanced offensive security approach, Threat Intelligence forms the essential foundation for threat-based exercises, particularly threat-led penetration testing. Without structured intelligence, a penetration test risks remaining too general and failing to reflect the behaviour of the targeted adversaries.
This central role is embodied in the Targeted Threat Intelligence Report (TTIR). This pivotal deliverable summarises intelligence specific to the targeted organisation (digital footprint, external exposure, credential leaks, mentions on underground forums, potential attackers and associated TTPs, etc.). It provides the direct link between strategic analysis and the Red Team’s operational execution.
Thanks to Cyber Threat Intelligence, attack scenarios become personalised and credible. The Red Team no longer merely exploits opportunistic vulnerabilities; it replicates the capabilities, constraints and tactical choices of identified adversaries. TTPs are selected and sequenced based on observed data, ensuring a high level of realism.
This approach is now formalised within regulatory frameworks. DORA and the TIBER-EU framework explicitly require intelligence-led testing, making Threat Intelligence no longer a supplement but a prerequisite for advanced resilience exercises.
Identifying and mapping critical functions is the first step. These services are defined by their significant impact on business operations, such as payment systems, bank transfers or access to patient records.
Each function is geographically located and linked to the IT systems and external service providers that support it, including cloud environments and third-party suppliers.
This mapping goes beyond a mere technical inventory. It justifies the inclusion of each function within the scope of the test based on its systemic and operational importance.
This approach ensures that attack scenarios target assets which, if compromised, would have the most serious consequences for the organisation.
Attack scenarios are designed to replicate realistic and comprehensive intrusion chains, covering the CIA triad (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability).
Each of these scenarios describes the complete attack path, from the initial point of entry to the achievement of objectives, incorporating the attacker’s technical sophistication and tactical agility. Together, they serve to simultaneously assess technology, processes and defence teams.
Scenario X is optional. It explores emerging or prospective threats without relying on historical data. It may incorporate innovative, hybrid or unconventional TTPs and simulate unprecedented adversarial behaviour.
The aim is to test the organisation’s resilience in the face of the unexpected, to identify previously unidentified vulnerabilities, and to challenge the adaptability of teams and systems. This scenario pushes the TLPT beyond conventional attacks, providing feedback on the overall robustness of security and operational maturity in the face of tomorrow’s threats.
Author: Elric PALLOT – Marketing Project Manager @Vaadata
