Definition
User behavior analytics ("UBA") as defined by Gartner, is a cybersecurity process about detection of insider threats, targeted attacks, and financial fraud. UBA solutions look at patterns of human behavior, and then apply algorithms and statistical analysis to detect meaningful anomalies from those patterns-anomalies that indicate potential threats.' Instead of tracking devices or security events, UBA tracks a system's users. Big data platforms are increasing UBA functionality by allowing them to analyze petabytes worth of data to detect insider threats and advanced persistent threats.
Technique Overview
Some techniques monitor patterns of human behavior and then apply algorithms and to identify patterns such as repeated login attempts from a single IP address or large file downloads, or abnormal accesses.
Other techniques may have explicit or rigid definitions of "bad behavior" which are then matched against instances in a computer network environment.
Implementation perspective
User Behavior Analysis 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, Domain User Account, Local User Account, Network Traffic.
Use the technique to identify suspicious, unauthorized, or abnormal activity through observable evidence and repeatable analysis.
Questions to ask
- Which events, states, or artifacts must be observed for the analysis to work?
- What analytic logic, threshold, comparison, or signature turns observations into a finding?
- How are expected false positives, blind spots, and environmental variations documented?
- Who receives the result, and what action is expected when the technique produces a finding?
Evidence and validation
- Telemetry and data-source configuration records
- Analytic logic, thresholds, signatures, and version history
- Test cases demonstrating expected positive and negative results
- Alert, triage, escalation, and tuning records
Common failure patterns
- Required telemetry is missing, delayed, or transformed in a way that invalidates the analysis.
- The technique produces alerts without an accountable triage and response process.
- Detection coverage is claimed from product deployment without testing the relevant analytic behavior.
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
None listed at this level.
Direct child techniques
- D3-ANET Authentication Event Thresholding
- D3-AZET Authorization Event Thresholding
- D3-CCSA Credential Compromise Scope Analysis
- D3-DAM Domain Account Monitoring
- D3-JFAPA Job Function Access Pattern Analysis
- D3-LAM Local Account Monitoring
- D3-RAPA Resource Access Pattern Analysis
- D3-SDA Session Duration Analysis
- D3-UDTA User Data Transfer Analysis
- D3-UGLPA User Geolocation Logon Pattern Analysis
- D3-WSAA Web Session Activity Analysis
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.
Show inferred artifact relationship paths (4)
NIST SP 800-53 relationships
The relation label is preserved from the D3FEND ontology. It is not converted into a claim that the control automatically implements or validates this technique.
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 (96)
Showing the first 60 of 96 source-derived relationships. Open the official D3FEND technique for the current graph view.
ATT&CK for ICS (21)
Authoritative sources
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.