MITRE ATT&CK vs The Cyber Kill Chain: Understanding Two Core Threat Models

If you’re studying for cybersecurity certifications or working toward a SOC role, you’ll eventually encounter two foundational concepts:

The Cyber Kill Chain
The MITRE ATT&CK Framework

At first glance, they seem similar – both describe how attacks unfold. But they serve slightly different purposes and are used in different ways inside security teams.

In this article, I’ll break down what each model is, how they differ, and why both are useful – especially for SOC and GRC professionals.

🔗 The Cyber Kill Chain

The Cyber Kill Chain, developed by Lockheed Martin, describes the stages of a cyberattack from start to finish.

The traditional 7 stages are:

Reconnaissance – Attacker gathers information about the target
Weaponization – Malicious payload is created
Delivery – Malware is delivered (email, phishing, exploit, etc.)
Exploitation – Vulnerability is exploited
Installation – Malware installs on the victim system
Command & Control (C2) – Attacker establishes remote control
Actions on Objectives – Data theft, destruction, lateral movement

Why It Matters

The Kill Chain is helpful because it introduces a simple but powerful idea:

If you can stop the attacker at any stage, you break the chain.

For SOC analysts, this helps frame detection and response:

Detect phishing → stop at Delivery
Block exploit → stop at Exploitation
Detect unusual outbound traffic → stop at Command & Control

The model is linear and easy to understand – which makes it useful for awareness training and executive discussions.

🎯 MITRE ATT&CK Framework

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is more detailed and behavior-focused.

Instead of describing a linear chain, ATT&CK organizes attacker activity into:

Tactics (the attacker’s objective)
Techniques (how they achieve that objective)
Sub-techniques (specific implementation details)

Examples of tactics include:

Initial Access
Execution
Persistence
Privilege Escalation
Defense Evasion
Lateral Movement
Exfiltration

Each tactic includes many mapped techniques, such as:

Phishing (Initial Access)
PowerShell execution (Execution)
Credential dumping (Credential Access)
Remote services for lateral movement

Why It Matters

MITRE ATT&CK is widely used in modern SOC environments because it helps teams:

Map detections to specific attacker techniques
Identify coverage gaps in monitoring
Build detection engineering use cases
Structure threat hunting activities

Unlike the Kill Chain, ATT&CK is not strictly linear. Attackers may move back and forth between tactics.

🔍 Key Differences

Cyber Kill Chain	MITRE ATT&CK
Linear model	Non-linear matrix
High-level stages	Detailed techniques & behaviors
Simple and conceptual	Operational and detection-focused
Good for executive explanations	Used heavily in SOC tooling & threat hunting

🛡️ How SOC Teams Use These Models

In practice:

The Kill Chain helps teams think about disrupting attacks early.
MITRE ATT&CK helps teams build detections and measure defensive coverage.

For example:

A SOC analyst might detect PowerShell abuse.
That maps to Execution in MITRE ATT&CK.
From a Kill Chain perspective, that could correspond to Exploitation or Installation.

Together, the models provide both strategic and operational clarity.

🧩 Why GRC Professionals Should Care

Even if you’re focused on governance and compliance, these frameworks are important.

Risk assessments often ask:

What attack scenarios are realistic?
Where are we most vulnerable?
Do our controls cover high-risk techniques?

MITRE ATT&CK can help map:

Controls → Techniques
Gaps → Specific attacker behaviors

This strengthens ISO 27001 risk registers and improves control justification.

🧠 My Takeaway

The Cyber Kill Chain gives you the big-picture narrative of how attacks unfold.
MITRE ATT&CK gives you the detailed behavioral map of how attackers operate.

For someone pursuing both SOC and GRC paths, understanding both frameworks is incredibly valuable:

One improves your detection mindset.
The other improves your control and governance mindset.

As I continue building out SOC lab projects and ISO 27001 risk documentation, I plan to reference MITRE ATT&CK more explicitly in detection mapping and risk analysis.

📌 Final Thoughts

Cybersecurity frameworks are not just academic theory. They shape how real security teams detect, respond, and justify controls.

If you’re early in your cybersecurity journey, I recommend:

Learn the Cyber Kill Chain first (for conceptual clarity).
Then explore MITRE ATT&CK (for operational depth).

Together, they form a strong mental model for understanding modern cyber defense.

Thanks for reading! 🙏

Feel free to reach out with questions or thoughts.