Definition
Removing tokens or credentials from an authentication cache to prevent further user associated account accesses.
How it works
Applications can locally cache user authentication credentials for certain server connections. An application may attempt to use the cached credential for a connection. If the cached credentials exist then the user will not be typically prompted for new credentials.
Considerations
Are these cached credentials only on the local host? Can they be persisted to the remote server?
Examples
Windows Credential Management API
Implementation perspective
Authentication Cache Invalidation should be treated as a technical defensive capability rather than a product checkbox. In practice, teams should define the protected scope, the conditions under which the technique acts, and the observable evidence that demonstrates the intended behavior. For this technique, likely engineering context includes Credential.
Use the technique to remove adversary access, malicious objects, processes, credentials, or persistence from the defended environment.
Questions to ask
- What evidence or decision threshold authorizes eviction?
- Which sessions, credentials, processes, objects, or dependencies must be removed together?
- How is business impact controlled while preventing the adversary from retaining access?
- What validation confirms that persistence and alternate access paths no longer remain?
Evidence and validation
- Approved containment and eviction procedures
- Case records showing the trigger, authorization, and actions taken
- Credential, session, object, or process invalidation records
- Post-action scans and monitoring showing that access did not recur
Common failure patterns
- Visible symptoms are removed while credentials, persistence, or alternate paths remain.
- Eviction begins before the scope is understood and causes the adversary to change behavior prematurely.
- Recovery and business restoration occur without post-eviction validation.
This implementation perspective is original Bare Metal Cyber educational content. It does not replace the official D3FEND definition or establish that a specific product implements the technique.
Technique hierarchy
Top-level family
Parent techniques
Direct child techniques
None listed at this level.
Artifacts and ontology entities
These relationships describe how D3FEND connects a defensive technique to artifacts or other ontology entities. They describe graph semantics, not a product certification.
Explicit technique relationships
Show inferred artifact relationship paths (1)
ATT&CK Enterprise mitigation relationships
These links come from the D3FEND ontology’s ATT&CK mitigation mapping. They help users navigate between the knowledge bases and do not guarantee mitigation effectiveness.
D3FEND note: M1015 scope is broad, touches on an wide variety of techniques in D3FEND.
D3FEND note: D3-AZET may be related (is potentially related though not called out in ATT&CK definition.)
Offensive-technique relationships
These relationships are generated from D3FEND graph paths and are explicitly experimental. They should be treated as hypotheses for defensive analysis—not as proof that the technique prevents, detects, or removes an offensive behavior.
ATT&CK Enterprise (20)
ATT&CK for ICS (3)
Authoritative sources
- Open this technique on the official D3FEND website ↗
- Open the official ontology resources ↗
- Secure caching of server credentials ↗Dell Products LP · Muhammed K. JaberMukund P. KhatriKevin T. MarksDon Charles McCall · PatentReference
- System and method for providing an actively invalidated client-side network resource cache ↗IMVU · Jon Watte · PatentReference
Bare Metal Cyber is an independent educational publisher and is not affiliated with or endorsed by The MITRE Corporation. MITRE D3FEND™ and the D3FEND logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. MITRE ATT&CK® and ATT&CK® are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Use of D3FEND source material is subject to the official Terms of Use.