<!-- Copyright (c) 2026 defconxt. All rights reserved. -->
<!-- Licensed under AGPL-3.0 — see LICENSE file for details. -->
---
name: performing-detection-validation-at-scale
description: >-
  Validate detection rules at scale using automated testing frameworks, attack simulation, and coverage measurement against ATT&CK matrices.
domain: cybersecurity
subdomain: detection-engineering
tags:
  - detection-validation
  - attack-simulation
  - coverage-analysis
  - automated-testing
  - att&ck-mapping
  - rule-quality
version: "1.0"
author: defconxt
license: AGPL-3.0
metadata:
  mitre-attack: []
---

# Performing Detection Validation at Scale

## Overview

Detection validation at scale ensures rule quality and coverage across the
entire detection portfolio. Covers automated testing frameworks, atomic red team
execution, coverage gap analysis, and continuous validation pipelines.

## Prerequisites

| Requirement | Purpose |
|---|---|
| atomic-red-team | Attack simulation library |
| ATT&CK Navigator | Coverage visualization |
| SIEM access | Query execution for validation |

## Key Concepts

### Validation Framework Architecture

```yaml
# Detection validation test case
test_case:
  id: TC-2026-001
  rule_id: sigma-7b2c4d5e
  technique: T1003.001
  description: "Validate LSASS credential dumping detection"
  simulation:
    tool: atomic-red-team
    test_id: T1003.001-1
    executor: powershell
  expected:
    alert_title: "LSASS Memory Access"
    min_severity: high
    max_latency_seconds: 60
  validation:
    query_window: 5m
    success_criteria: "alert_count >= 1"
```

## Workflow

1. **Inventory rules** — Catalog all detection rules with ATT&CK mappings
2. **Map coverage** — Visualize coverage against ATT&CK Navigator layers
3. **Design test cases** — Create validation tests for each detection rule
4. **Execute simulations** — Run atomic tests or purple team scenarios
5. **Validate alerts** — Confirm expected alerts fire within latency SLAs
6. **Measure metrics** — Calculate TP/FP rates, coverage, and detection latency
7. **Report gaps** — Document coverage gaps with remediation priorities

## Verification

| Check | Method |
|---|---|
| Workflow completed | All steps executed and documented |
| Output validated | Results match expected format and content |
| Quality assured | Peer review or automated validation passed |

## References

- [NIST Cybersecurity Framework](https://www.nist.gov/cyberframework)
- [MITRE ATT&CK](https://attack.mitre.org/)
