Knowledge is Power

Sitewide Search

Search Bare Metal Cyber

Search courses, individual lessons, wiki entries, books, podcasts, magazine articles, Daily Cyber News, and Darwin.

MITRE D3FEND™ Learning Center

D3-DNR — Decoy Network Resource

Deploying a network resource for the purposes of deceiving an adversary.

8Enterprise inferred
1Parent technique
1Related artifact
4Source references

Deceive · D3FEND ontology 1.6.0 · Active

Open official technique ↗
Official D3FEND definition

Definition

Deploying a network resource for the purposes of deceiving an adversary.

Official D3FEND knowledge-base content

How it works

Decoy network resources are deployed to web application servers, network file shares, or other network based sharing services.

A "honeypot" may serve a variety of decoy network resources.

Considerations

  • Developing a deployment and placement strategy for the decoy network resource.
  • Personnel responsible for creation of decoy networks should consider the potential for resource exhaustion through denial of service attacks.

Examples

  • Honeypots are typically used to mimic a known system with fake vulnerabilities. This may attract attackers to the honeypot.
  • Decoy accounts are also used to scan for attempted logins. The decoy accounts can provide security analysts with the attacker's potential intents and strategies.
  • Tarpits are used to monitor unallocated IP space for unauthorized network activity.
Bare Metal Cyber interpretation

Implementation perspective

Decoy Network Resource 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 Network Resource.

Use the technique to present controlled information, services, or artifacts that shape adversary behavior and create observable interaction.

Questions to ask

  • What behavior is the deceptive element intended to attract, delay, reveal, or redirect?
  • How is the deceptive element made plausible without creating unacceptable operational risk?
  • Which interactions are monitored, and who investigates them?
  • How is the deceptive environment isolated from production systems and sensitive data?

Evidence and validation

  • Design records describing the deception objective and placement
  • Isolation and containment test results
  • Monitoring and alert-routing configuration
  • Interaction records and documented investigative outcomes

Common failure patterns

  • The deceptive element is obvious, stale, or inconsistent with the surrounding environment.
  • Interactions are collected but not reviewed or connected to response processes.
  • The decoy introduces a new pathway to production data or systems.

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.

Ontology hierarchy

Technique hierarchy

Top-level family

Parent techniques

Direct child techniques

None listed at this level.

D3FEND graph relationships

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

spoofsNetwork Resource
Show inferred artifact relationship paths (1)
Decoy Network ResourcespoofsNetwork Resource
Inferred and experimental

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 (8)
Source record

Authoritative sources