Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) such as IP addresses, file hashes, and domain names are commonly used for threat detection and attribution. However, IOCs tend to be short-lived as they are easy to change. As a result, the cybersecurity community is shifting focus towards more persistent behavioral profiles, such as the Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) and the software used by a threat group. However, the distinctiveness and completeness of such behavioral profiles remain largely unexplored. In this work, we systematically analyze threat group profiles built from two open cyber threat intelligence (CTI) knowledge bases: MITRE ATT&CK and Malpedia. We first investigate what fraction of threat groups have group-specific behaviors, i.e., behaviors used exclusively by a single group. We find that only 34% of threat groups in ATT&CK have group-specific techniques. The software used by a threat group proves to be more distinctive, with 73% of ATT&CK groups using group-specific software. However, this percentage drops to 24% in the broader Malpedia dataset. Next, we evaluate how group profiles improve when data from both sources are combined. While coverage improves modestly, the proportion of groups with group-specific behaviors remains under 30%. We then enhance profiles by adding exploited vulnerabilities and additional techniques extracted from more threat reports. Despite the additional information, 64% of groups still lack any group-specific behavior. Our findings raise concerns on the belief that behavioral profiles can replace IOCs in threat group attribution.
View on arXiv@article{saha2025_2506.10645,
title={ From IOCs to Group Profiles: On the Specificity of Threat Group Behaviors in CTI Knowledge Bases },
author={ Aakanksha Saha and Martina Lindorfer and Juan Caballero },
journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.10645},
year={ 2025 }
}