Live Active security incident? Get immediate response
MITRE ATT&CK® Analytic

AN1961: Analytic 1961

Once adversaries leverage serverless functions as infrastructure (ex: for command and control), it may be possible to look for unique characteristics associated with adversary software, if known.[1] Much of this activity will take place outside the visibility of the target organization, making detection of this behavior difficult. Detection efforts may be focused on related stages of the adversary lifecycle.

EnterpriseAN1961AnalyticObject v1.0 Modified
Glexia's Take

Analyst context for executives and security teams

Analyst confidence Medium

AN1961 matters because adversaries may use serverless functions as part of their infrastructure, such as command-and-control infrastructure, in ways that often sit outside a victim organization’s direct visibility. For leaders, the practical issue is not that this analytic guarantees detection, but that cloud-hosted, ephemeral infrastructure can reduce the value of traditional perimeter-focused monitoring and requires stronger threat intelligence, lifecycle-based detection, and incident response assumptions.

Executive priority

Treat this as a visibility and preparedness issue. Security leaders should ask whether the organization can recognize suspicious use of external serverless infrastructure through threat intelligence, DNS/proxy/network observations, and related adversary lifecycle signals. Because the ATT&CK description notes that much of the activity may occur outside the target organization’s visibility, investment decisions should prioritize evidence collection and response playbooks around observable interactions rather than assuming direct insight into the adversary-controlled serverless environment.

Technical view

This analytic is scoped to PRE and has no supplied tactic or formal detection logic. SOC and detection engineering teams should validate whether they can correlate known or suspected adversary infrastructure characteristics with locally visible events, especially outbound connections, DNS lookups, proxy records, and threat intelligence matches. IR teams should avoid over-relying on direct telemetry from the adversary’s serverless functions and instead focus on related lifecycle evidence that may be visible inside the environment.

Likely telemetry

  • Threat intelligence indicators and infrastructure characteristics from vetted sources
  • DNS query and resolution logs
  • Proxy, secure web gateway, or egress web request logs
  • Firewall or network egress metadata
  • Endpoint or workload network connection records where available

Detection direction

  • Validate whether detections can use known unique characteristics of adversary software or infrastructure without assuming direct access to serverless provider-side telemetry.
  • Tune correlation around outbound communication patterns and infrastructure intelligence rather than single indicators alone, since serverless infrastructure can be transient or shared.
  • Account for false positives from legitimate cloud and serverless services used by business applications.
  • Use related lifecycle detections to compensate for the stated visibility gap; this object provides no standalone detection logic.
  • Document which telemetry sources are actually retained and searchable during incident response.

Mitigation priorities

  • Improve egress visibility and logging for DNS, web, proxy, and network connections.
  • Maintain a vetted threat intelligence process for infrastructure characteristics relevant to investigations.
  • Define IR playbooks for suspicious external cloud or serverless infrastructure communications, including evidence preservation and scoping steps.
  • Review allowlisting, egress policy, and cloud access governance where business operations permit.
  • Use this analytic to identify monitoring gaps rather than to claim prevention or complete detection coverage.
Analyst notes and limits

The supplied ATT&CK object is a detection analytic, not a technique, and includes no relationships, no tactic mapping, and no official detection implementation. The key decision value is the visibility limitation: defenders may need to detect interactions with adversary infrastructure indirectly through local telemetry and related lifecycle activity.

Assessment is limited to the supplied ATT&CK fields and one external reference. No active exploitation, attribution, affected vendor, guaranteed detection method, or customer exposure can be inferred. Local environment architecture, logging coverage, and threat intelligence quality are required to determine practical coverage.

Official MITRE ATT&CK definition

Analytic 1961

Once adversaries leverage serverless functions as infrastructure (ex: for command and control), it may be possible to look for unique characteristics associated with adversary software, if known.[1] Much of this activity will take place outside the visibility of the target organization, making detection of this behavior difficult. Detection efforts may be focused on related stages of the adversary lifecycle.

View the same entry on attack.mitre.org (MITRE-hosted reference; in-page links above use the Glexia ATT&CK library.)

Glexia analysis

How security teams should use this page

Treat this object as behavior context, not an attribution claim. Validate the related groups, software, data sources, and mitigations against official ATT&CK relationships and your own telemetry before making control-coverage decisions.

Relationship explorer

All related ATT&CK context

No relationships are available in the current normalized data for this object.

Change history

Object version and sync metadata

The fields below describe the current mirrored snapshot. When Glexia retains multiple ATT&CK source imports, you can open the table to compare the same object across releases (hashes and MITRE timestamps). For MITRE’s own release notes and roadmap, see ATT&CK resources — Updates .

ATT&CK release
19.1
Object version
1.0
Created
Modified
Raw hash
060e6236b904fcfb...
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
Release Bundle imported Object version Modified Status Raw hash
19.1 1.0 Current bundle 060e6236b904…
Raw source

Mirrored ATT&CK source object

The raw object is retained through the mirrored ATT&CK source bundle and object hash. The raw endpoint returns the exact object from the mirrored bundle when available.

Source references

External references and citations

MITRE external references are preserved separately from Glexia analysis so citations remain traceable to their original source records.

  1. [1]
    ThreatConnect Infrastructure Dec 2020

    ThreatConnect. (2020, December 15). Infrastructure Research and Hunting: Boiling the Domain Ocean. Retrieved October 12, 2021.

    Open source URL
  2. [2]
    mitre-attack AN1961
    Open source URL
Source and licensing

Source: MITRE ATT&CK®. © 2026 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation. MITRE ATT&CK and ATT&CK are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Glexia is not affiliated with or endorsed by MITRE.