cti-hyperloop
Skill35 starsChanged 44 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user asks about the CTI Hyperloop framework, the intelligence lifecycle as a high-tempo loop, or how to map intelligence work across strategic / operational / tactical levels with bidirectional feedback. Liberty91's operational doctrine.
In this repository79 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- abuseipdb-apiSkill
- achSkill
- campaign-trackingSkill
- carding-financial-fraudSkill
- censys-apiSkill
- china-cyber-espionageSkill
- claim-extractionSkill
- confidence-levelsSkill
- control-coverage-mappingSkill
- crowdstrike-apiSkill
- cti-orchestratorSkill
- cti-setupSkill
- darkweb-collectionSkill
- devils-advocacySkill
- domain-investigationSkill
- dprk-cyber-espionageSkill
- feedback-loopsSkill
- greynoise-apiSkill
- hacktivismSkill
- hash-investigationSkill
- horizon-scanningSkill
- indicator-pivotingSkill
- infostealersSkill
- initial-access-brokersSkill
- intelligence-sharingSkill
- intelligence-writingSkill
- ioc-enrichment-workflowSkill
- ioc-exportSkill
- ip-investigationSkill
- iran-cyber-espionageSkill
- key-assumptions-checkSkill
- kql-writingSkill
- likelihood-languageSkill
- lookup-abuseipdbSkill
- lookup-censysSkill
- lookup-crowdstrikeSkill
- lookup-greynoiseSkill
- lookup-liberty91Skill
- lookup-mispSkill
- lookup-openctiSkill
- lookup-otxSkill
- lookup-ransomwareliveSkill
- lookup-reversinglabsSkill
- lookup-sentinelSkill
- lookup-shodanSkill
- lookup-urlscanSkill
- lookup-virustotalSkill
- malware-analysisSkill
- maturity-assessmentSkill
- mitre-attackSkill
- osint-methodologySkill
- otx-apiSkill
- phishing-social-engineeringSkill
- pir-managementSkill
- quality-controlSkill
- quality-of-information-checkSkill
- ransomware-ecosystemSkill
- reversinglabs-apiSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 117
When the orchestrator receives a task, it maps it to the Hyperloop:
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
CTI Hyperloop Framework
The CTI Hyperloop (based on Google/Mandiant's practical implementation framework) extends the traditional intelligence cycle by running it at three levels simultaneously with continuous bidirectional feedback.
Core Concept
Traditional intelligence cycle: linear, single-track, often stuck at the tactical level. Hyperloop: three parallel tracks (strategic, operational, tactical) feeding each other continuously.
STRATEGIC ←→ OPERATIONAL ←→ TACTICAL
↓ ↓ ↓
Direction → Collection → Processing → Analysis → Dissemination → Feedback
↑ |
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Intelligence Levels
Strategic Intelligence
- Time horizon: 6-24 months
- Consumers: CISO, Board, Risk Management, Security Architecture
- Focus: Threat landscape trends, emerging threats, geopolitical developments, sector risk posture
- Products: Threat landscape reports, strategic assessments, horizon scanning reports, maturity assessments
- Example PIR: "How will the ransomware threat landscape evolve over the next 12 months and what are the implications for our risk posture?"
Operational Intelligence
- Time horizon: Weeks to months
- Consumers: SOC Manager, IR Lead, Security Operations
- Focus: Active campaigns, threat actor profiling, TTP analysis, vulnerability exploitation trends
- Products: Campaign reports, threat actor profiles, operational assessments, hunt packages
- Example PIR: "What TTPs are currently being used by groups targeting our sector?"
Tactical Intelligence
- Time horizon: Hours to days
- Consumers: SOC Analysts, Detection Engineers, IR Analysts
- Focus: IOCs, detection rules, immediate response support, indicator enrichment
- Products: IOC packages, SIGMA/YARA/KQL rules, flash reports, enrichment reports
- Example PIR: "What IOCs are associated with the current wave of attacks targeting our VPN appliances?"
Phase Mapping to Platform
Phase 1: Planning & Direction
What: Define what intelligence is needed and set priorities.
| Level | Activity | Agent | Skills |
| Strategic | Set/review PIRs, horizon scanning briefs | orchestrator | pir-management, stakeholder-management |
| Operational | Define collection priorities for active investigations | orchestrator | pir-management, sops |
| Tactical | Identify IOC collection gaps, detection coverage gaps | orchestrator | sops |
Phase 2: Collection
What: Gather raw data from relevant sources.
| Level | Activity | Agent | Skills |
| Strategic | Trend monitoring, landscape research | osint-researcher | osint-methodology |
| Operational | Threat actor tracking, campaign research, dark web monitoring | osint-researcher, tool agents | osint-methodology, darkweb-collection |
| Tactical | IOC lookups, bulk enrichment | tool agents, ioc-processor | tool-api skills, ioc-enrichment-workflow |
Phase 3: Processing
What: Normalise, deduplicate, and structure collected data.
| Level | Activity | Agent | Skills |
| All | IOC deduplication, format normalisation, source assessment tagging | ioc-processor | ioc-enrichment-workflow, source-assessment |
Phase 4: Analysis
What: Apply human judgment to produce assessed intelligence.
| Level | Activity | Agent | Skills |
| Strategic | Horizon scanning, maturity assessment, trend analysis | analyst | horizon-scanning, threat-assessment, maturity-assessment |
| Operational | ACH, threat actor profiling, campaign tracking | analyst | ach, threat-actor-profiling, campaign-tracking, key-assumptions-check |
| Tactical | IOC correlation, detection gap analysis, indicator pivoting | analyst | indicator-pivoting, vulnerability-intelligence |
Phase 5: Dissemination
What: Deliver finished intelligence to stakeholders.
| Level | Activity | Agent | Skills |
| Strategic | Landscape reports, annual assessments, board briefings | report-writer | intelligence-writing, writing-assessments, stakeholder-management |
| Operational | Actor profiles, campaign reports, operational assessments | report-writer | intelligence-writing, writing-assessments |
| Tactical | IOC packages, detection rules, flash reports | detection-engineer, ioc-processor, report-writer | sigma/yara/kql-writing, ioc-export, stix-bundle |
Phase 6: Feedback
What: Assess effectiveness and refine direction.
| Level | Activity | Agent | Skills |
| All | Consumer feedback, source quality tracking, PIR refinement | orchestrator | feedback-loops, pir-management |
Bidirectional Flow Examples
Tactical → Operational: IOC enrichment reveals infrastructure pattern shared across multiple incidents → triggers campaign tracking investigation.
Operational → Strategic: Campaign analysis identifies new nation-state actor shifting targeting to a new sector → feeds into strategic landscape assessment and PIR update.
Strategic → Operational: Horizon scanning identifies AI-augmented social engineering as emerging threat → creates operational collection tasking for specific TTP monitoring.
Operational → Tactical: Threat actor profiling reveals preferred exploitation technique → drives creation of specific SIGMA detection rules.
Strategic → Tactical: Risk assessment identifies unpatched VPN as critical exposure → prioritises vulnerability intelligence and IOC monitoring for VPN exploits.
Tactical → Strategic: Spike in credential-stuffing alerts → informs strategic assessment of the underground economy and infostealer trend.
Orchestrator Workflow Mapping
When the orchestrator receives a task, it maps it to the Hyperloop:
| User Request | Primary Level | Hyperloop Phases | Key Agents |
| "Investigate this IP" | Tactical | 2→3→4→5 | Tool agents → IOC processor → Analyst → Detection engineer |
| "Profile this threat actor" | Operational | 2→3→4→5→6 | OSINT researcher → IOC processor → Analyst → Report writer → Update knowledge cell |
| "Write a threat assessment on X" | Strategic/Operational | 1→2→3→4→5→6 | Orchestrator (PIRs) → OSINT researcher → Analyst (SATs) → Report writer → Quality reviewer |
| "Enrich this IOC list" | Tactical | 2→3→5 | Tool agents → IOC processor → Export |
| "What's the current ransomware landscape?" | Strategic | 2→4→5 | OSINT researcher → Analyst (knowledge cell) → Report writer |
| "Create detection rules for APT28 TTPs" | Tactical | 4→5 | Analyst (knowledge cell) → Detection engineer |
| "Review our PIRs" | Management | 1→6 | Orchestrator (PIR management, feedback loops) |
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

