Threat › Module 9 › Lesson 1
Analysis Notes
TI analysis notes literacy — hypotheses, confidence, sourcing, timeline — on `$TI_LAB` analysis stub only.
Visual · t33_analysis_notes
Analysis notes = named analytic rows. $TI_LAB. Original Cyberlium.
Opening
Raw feeds are not finished intel — name analysis note rows on YOUR lab stubs before shipping unsubstantiated claims to prod stakeholders.
Analysis notes literacy names: key judgment/hypothesis category, confidence level (low/medium/high literacy), source summary and reliability stub, timeline of events category, assumptions and gaps category, and alternative hypothesis row. Analyst drafts analysis notes template on `$TI_LAB` — fills one fictional scenario stub with three sourced facts, two hypotheses, confidence stub — without presenting marketplace leak as verified fact, without single-source critical claims, without prod stakeholder brief without RoE. Cyberlium teaches analytic tradecraft vocabulary on YOUR notes — defender reporting hygiene. Refused: marketplace source as fact, fabricated attribution, skip confidence labeling. Lab row: analysis notes template filled for one lab scenario stub.
1. Named analytic rows
Hypothesis, confidence, sourcing, timeline, gaps, alternatives — six literacy anchors.
Each fact cites lab stub source ID — not unlabeled paste.
Command guide
Try these commands — Named analytic rows
═══ TOOLS & WEBSITES ═══ Browse / read these (authorized learning only — stay in YOUR lab / program scope)
CISA analysis — https://www.cisa.gov/topics/cyber-threats-and-advisories MITRE ATT&CK — https://attack.mitre.org/ FIRST — https://www.first.org/
═══ INSTALL ═══
Linux (Debian/Ubuntu):
Command — copy this
sudo apt install python3
macOS:
Command — copy this
brew install python3
Windows: Download https://python.org/downloads/
═══ LINUX / macOS ═══
Command — copy this
export TI_LAB=${TI_LAB:-$HOME/cyberlium-lab/t33-ti}
cat > "$TI_LAB/reports/analysis-notes-template.md" <<'EOF'
# TI Analysis Notes — YOUR fake campaign
## Raw observations
- Fake domain phish-lab.example.com observed in lab CSV
- RFC1918 IP 192.168.99.50 tagged c2-fake in notes
## Context
- Map to T1566.002 + T1071.001 (verify attack.mitre.org)
## Assessment
- Likelihood: N/A (lab exercise) | Impact if real: medium phishing risk
## Confidence
- Low — synthetic data for training only
## Gaps
- Need vendor confirmation before production block
Separate facts (IOC values) from analysis (intent attribution)
EOFCommand — copy this
grep -E 'Assessment|Confidence|facts|attack.mitre' "$TI_LAB/reports/analysis-notes-template.md"
Primary tools to practice this lesson: grep, python3. Reference sites: CISA analysis (https://www.cisa.gov/topics/cyber-threats-and-advisories); MITRE ATT&CK (https://attack.mitre.org/); FIRST (https://www.first.org/). Run every command in the box — install first, then the usage lines — only on YOUR lab / program scope.
2. Confidence discipline
Confidence states evidence strength — document low/medium/high stub with rationale.
Alternative hypothesis row prevents single-narrative bias on lab scenario.
3. Refused
No marketplace leak as verified fact; no fabricated critical attribution.
Analysis notes support decision support — not FUD or weaponization.
4. What you ship: analysis notes template
One filled lab scenario + confidence + alternatives + NEVER marketplace-as-fact line.
5. What you record before the next lesson
Analysis notes template path.
6. Wrong vs right: criminal markets vs YOUR lab IOCs
Worked failure — same MSF word, opposite target. Right never needs a café Wi-Fi or classmate laptop.
Wrong
Present marketplace leak IOC as 'confirmed APT' in analysis notes without validation.
Right
Analysis notes from `$TI_LAB` scenario stub. Next: TI Reports.
Mission: analysis notes template
1) Name six analytic rows. 2) Fill template for one lab scenario. 3) Confidence rationale UTC. 4) Write NEVER marketplace-as-fact line.
Stuck? Ask Cyberlium AI Mentor
Ask Mentor: “Alternative hypothesis — minimum literacy?”
Knowledge Check
APPLY: Analysis notes use:
Multiple choice
Knowledge Check
APPLY: True or False: Single-source critical claims without confidence label are OK.
True or False
Knowledge Check
APPLY: Analysis rows include:
Multiple choice