Continuous, Automated Simulation
Run MITRE ATT&CK-mapped simulations automatically on an ongoing schedule across endpoint, email, network, and SIEM layers — without manual coordination or downtime.
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
Breach and Attack Simulation Platform
Continuous security control validation.
Valitrix is a breach and attack simulation platform that replays real adversary techniques against live controls — endpoint, email, network, and SIEM. Every test is mapped to MITRE ATT&CK. Every result is evidence you can act on.
- Validate prevention, detection, and response across EDR, email gateway, NGFW, and SIEM.
- Map every simulation result to MITRE ATT&CK tactics and technique IDs.
- Turn missed detections into remediation and detection-engineering work.
What Is Breach and Attack Simulation?
A clear definition security teams can act on.
Breach and Attack Simulation is…
The continuous, automated process of replaying real adversary techniques against live security controls to verify whether attacks are blocked, detected, logged, and escalated correctly — mapped to MITRE ATT&CK at technique granularity.
Unlike penetration testing — which is point-in-time and manual — BAS runs continuously. Valitrix deploys lightweight simulation agents across your environment and replays 200+ ATT&CK-mapped techniques against your endpoint, email, network, and SIEM controls on an ongoing schedule, so you always know your real prevention and detection coverage.
Every simulation result is evidence. Not a score. Not a vendor claim. A definitive blocked / detected / logged-only / missed outcome with the underlying telemetry, the ATT&CK mapping, and the remediation guidance your team needs to close the gap.
Valitrix BAS helps by…
Running controlled, MITRE ATT&CK-mapped simulations across endpoint, email, network, and SIEM layers — measuring whether each attack was blocked, detected, logged, or missed — then surfacing actionable remediation for every gap found.
Security teams use BAS to…
Continuously prove the real effectiveness of security controls between human-led engagements, catch control drift before attackers exploit it, and generate evidence-based reporting for auditors, boards, and detection engineers.
The main outputs are…
A per-technique prevention and detection scorecard, MITRE ATT&CK coverage heatmap, missed-detection list with remediation guidance, SIEM visibility assessment, control drift alerts, and executive-ready risk reporting.
What is a BAS platform?
Software that makes security validation continuous and measurable.
Breach and attack simulation is the practice. A BAS platform is the system that operationalises it: agents, an ATT&CK-mapped simulation library, scheduling, evidence capture, reporting, and retest. Valitrix is that platform — built for CISOs, SOC managers, detection engineers, and validation teams who need proof, not another dashboard of assumed coverage.
If you are comparing adjacent approaches, read what is breach and attack simulation, BAS vs penetration testing, and adversarial exposure validation.
- Lightweight agents on Windows, Linux, and macOS
- ATT&CK-mapped simulation library with custom scenario support
- Control-layer coverage: endpoint, email, network, SIEM, identity TTPs
- Executive reporting plus detection-engineering outputs
- Production-safe, scope-approved, inert artifacts
- Automated retesting when a previously passing control drifts
Why Breach and Attack Simulation Matters
Assumed security coverage is not the same as proven security coverage.
Security controls degrade silently. Policy changes, agent updates, SIEM rule drift, and new attack techniques create gaps that go undetected until an incident exposes them. BAS finds those gaps first — continuously — so your team can fix them before attackers exploit them.
Controls degrade without anyone noticing
Policy exceptions, temporary rules, agent updates, and exclusion changes silently degrade detection coverage between annual tests. Continuous BAS catches drift in real time.
Point-in-time tests go stale immediately
A penetration test is valid on the day it runs. By the time remediation is complete, the environment has changed. BAS gives you continuous assurance — not a snapshot.
Vendor coverage claims aren't evidence
Vendors test against their own benchmarks. BAS tests against your actual environment, your configuration, your telemetry pipeline — and produces definitive outcomes.
SIEM blindness hides what's already missed
If endpoint, email, and network events don't reach the SIEM with sufficient context, attacks that bypass prevention controls go completely undetected. BAS surfaces that gap.
BAS CapabilitiesContinuous, Evidence-Based
Continuous, Evidence-Based
Security Control Validation.
Valitrix BAS covers every stage of security control validation — from continuous simulation scheduling and ATT&CK technique coverage through to detection gap analysis, regression alerting, and evidence-backed remediation guidance.
Full MITRE ATT&CK Technique Coverage
Validate against the complete ATT&CK library across all 14 tactical categories — from initial access and execution through to lateral movement, exfiltration, and impact.
Multi-Layer Control Validation
Test endpoint (EDR/XDR), email gateway, network (NGFW/IDS/IPS), and SIEM controls together — so gaps in one layer don't stay hidden behind another.
Real Telemetry, Not Simulated Scores
Every simulation generates real telemetry — the same signals a genuine attacker would produce — so you see actual blocked/detected/missed outcomes, not vendor benchmark scores.
Detection Gap Analysis
Identify which ATT&CK techniques your controls miss, log without alerting, or detect with low-confidence evidence — ranked by risk severity and control layer.
Remediation-Ready Evidence
Every missed detection comes with ATT&CK-mapped remediation guidance, hardening steps, detection logic recommendations, and a retest plan your team can act on immediately.
Executive and Technical Reporting
Generate ATT&CK coverage heatmaps, prevention and detection rates, trend lines, and executive-ready risk summaries from the same simulation run.
Regression Alerting on Control Drift
Detect when a previously-passing control starts failing — after agent updates, rule changes, or policy modifications — before an attacker exploits the regression.
How Valitrix BAS Works
Threat intelligence → simulation → detection → remediation → retest.
01
Ingest threat context
Start from relevant threat intelligence, ATT&CK coverage gaps, and the controls you need to prove — not a generic, one-size-fits-all scenario pack.
02
Select and sequence simulations
Choose ATT&CK-mapped techniques — ransomware, phishing, C2, credential access, lateral movement, exfiltration — or campaigns relevant to your sector.
03
Run production-safe simulations
Lightweight agents execute inert techniques against live endpoint, email, network, and SIEM controls within a defined, authorised scope.
04
Measure detection and prevention
Each run records blocked, detected, logged-only, or missed — with telemetry evidence, ATT&CK mapping, and investigation context.
05
Remediate with engineering guidance
Missed detections become a detection-engineering backlog: rule tuning, policy hardening, telemetry gaps, and executive-ready risk summaries.
06
Retest until the gap stays closed
After a fix, re-run the same technique to confirm the control still works — and alert if a previously passing control starts failing.
How the simulation executes
- Scope. Operators approve hosts, time windows, and technique categories. Agents run only inside that boundary on Windows, Linux, and macOS.
- Artifacts. Payloads are inert. They generate the same class of telemetry a real attacker would, without malware, data theft, or service disruption.
- Telemetry. Each run checks endpoint (EDR/AV/XDR), email (SEG and attachment controls), network (NGFW, IDS/IPS, DNS, DLP), and SIEM ingestion plus correlation.
- Outcome. Every technique is classified blocked, detected, logged-only, or missed — with the ATT&CK tactic, technique ID, and control layer attached.
What the evidence includes
- Per-technique prevention and detection result, not a blended vendor score.
- SIEM visibility: did the log arrive, did the rule fire, and did a SOC-usable alert appear?
- Detection-engineering actions for missed or logged-only outcomes — rule, policy, or telemetry gaps.
- Retest of the same technique ID after the fix, plus drift alerts if a previously passing control starts failing.
Technique-level coverage reporting lives on MITRE ATT&CK simulation coverage. Module-level detail is on endpoint, email, network, and SIEM validation.
Security controls Valitrix validates
One BAS platform. Every control layer you already bought.
Valitrix does not replace EDR, email gateways, firewalls, or SIEM. It tells you whether those products actually prevent, detect, log, and escalate the techniques they were bought to stop.
Endpoint security validation
Test live EDR, AV, EPP, and XDR against execution, credential access, persistence, and ransomware-style behaviour — with per-technique blocked / detected / missed evidence.
EDR, AV & XDR testingNetwork security validation
Validate NGFW, IDS/IPS, segmentation, C2, DNS tunneling, and egress controls against realistic malware traffic and east-west movement.
Network infiltration & malware validationSIEM security validation
Prove log ingestion, parsing, correlation rules, alert quality, and SOC evidence — not just that a rule exists on paper.
SIEM security validationEmail gateway security validation
Measure whether the secure email gateway blocks phishing, malicious attachments, spoofing, and URL-based delivery — the most common initial-access path.
Email security validationIdentity security validation
Validate identity-related TTPs — credential dumping, privilege escalation, token abuse — through endpoint simulations and identity telemetry in the SIEM. There is no separate identity product SKU; identity is tested as part of the control stack.
Identity telemetry in SIEM validationMalware download validation
Test whether email, network, and endpoint controls stop staged malware delivery — attachments, payloads, and follow-on execution — before a real loader reaches production hosts.
Malware traffic validationValidate Endpoint, Network, Email, and SIEM Controls Continuously
Eight simulation scenarios. Real control outcomes.
BAS doesn't just show whether a scenario ran. It shows whether your controls blocked it, detected it, logged it, correlated it, and generated useful evidence for investigation and remediation.
Detected
PowerShell execution simulation — EDR detection tested
Tactic: Execution
Technique: T1059.001
Control: EDR / SIEM detection rule
Action: Verify alert includes command-line context and severity is correctly assigned.
Blocked
Credential dumping simulation — endpoint policy validated
Tactic: Credential Access
Technique: T1003.001
Control: EDR credential protection policy
Action: Confirm EDR alert was forwarded to SIEM and correlation rule fired.
Missed
C2 beacon simulation — SIEM detection missing
Tactic: Command & Control
Technique: T1071.001
Control: Proxy / SIEM C2 correlation
Action: Add SIEM correlation rule for outbound beaconing pattern; review proxy logging coverage.
Logged Only
Lateral movement simulation — escalation rule absent
Tactic: Lateral Movement
Technique: T1021.002
Control: Internal IDS / SIEM east-west rule
Action: Create SIEM correlation rule for SMB lateral movement mapped to T1021.002.
Blocked
Phishing delivery simulation — gateway policy validated
Tactic: Initial Access
Technique: T1566.001
Control: Email gateway sandbox / attachment policy
Action: Confirm email gateway event is forwarded to SIEM for investigation context.
Blocked
Ransomware behaviour simulation — endpoint policy validated
Tactic: Impact
Technique: T1486
Control: EDR behavioural detection / ransomware policy
Action: Confirm endpoint telemetry reached SIEM and alert includes process chain evidence.
Detected
Privilege escalation simulation — alert quality low
Tactic: Privilege Escalation
Technique: T1548.002
Control: EDR UAC bypass detection / SIEM enrichment
Action: Improve alert enrichment — add affected user account, process name, and asset context.
Missed
DNS tunneling simulation — detection missing
Tactic: Exfiltration
Technique: T1048.003
Control: DNS security / SIEM anomaly rule
Action: Enable DNS query anomaly detection; configure SIEM rule for high-volume subdomain patterns.
Illustrative simulation outcomes — results depend on your security control configuration, telemetry coverage, and SIEM correlation rules. All simulations use safe, authorized artifacts and target scope-approved systems only.
Threat-Informed MITRE ATT&CK Simulation
MITRE ATT&CK-Aligned Simulation Coverage across all 14 tactical categories.
Every technique in Valitrix is mapped to a MITRE ATT&CK tactic and technique ID — giving CISOs, SOC teams, detection engineers, and compliance teams a shared framework for coverage reporting, remediation prioritization, and risk communication.
Reconnaissance
Resource Development
Initial Access
Execution
Persistence
Privilege Escalation
Defense Evasion
Credential Access
Discovery
Lateral Movement
Collection
Command & Control
Exfiltration
Impact
Technique coverage mapped to MITRE ATT&CK tactics and IDs. Every simulation result tags the specific technique tested — so your ATT&CK heatmap reflects reality, not vendor claims.
View ATT&CK CoverageMeasurable Outputs
From Control Gaps to Prioritized Remediation.
Valitrix BAS produces concrete, evidence-backed outputs that security teams can use for detection engineering, remediation prioritization, executive reporting, and compliance evidence — mapped to MITRE ATT&CK for a shared language across all stakeholders.
What Valitrix BAS measures
- Prevention rate — percentage of techniques blocked by preventive controls
- Detection rate — percentage generating a usable alert per ATT&CK tactic
- Blocked vs detected vs logged-only vs missed by control layer
- SIEM visibility and alert quality per simulated technique
- ATT&CK technique coverage — tested, detected, and missed
- Control drift — techniques that previously passed and now fail
- Time to detect (MTTD) per simulated attack stage
- Endpoint, email, network, and SIEM control coverage heatmap
- Risk score by attack path, tactic, and control layer
- Remediation priority and detection engineering action list
- Retest evidence after rule tuning or policy improvements
Breach and Attack Simulation Use Cases
Real-world scenarios where BAS delivers evidence.
Prove security controls are working continuously
Move from assumed coverage to measured coverage — with simulation evidence that shows exactly what was blocked, detected, and missed in your live environment.
Catch control drift before attackers do
Detect when a previously-passing control starts failing after agent updates, SIEM rule changes, or policy modifications — before an adversary exploits the regression.
Map real coverage to MITRE ATT&CK
Replace vendor-claimed coverage with simulation-proven ATT&CK heatmaps that reflect your actual configuration, telemetry, and detection rules.
Prioritize remediation by true risk
Focus engineering effort on the missed detections that represent the highest real risk — ranked by ATT&CK tactic, control layer, and exploitation likelihood.
Validate security posture between pen tests
Maintain continuous assurance between annual human-led engagements — so you know the fundamentals are working, not just when the pen test runs.
Support purple team exercises with evidence
Use simulation results to plan controlled red vs blue exercises and compare expected vs actual defensive outcomes across endpoint, network, email, and SIEM.
Generate audit-ready control effectiveness evidence
Produce repeatable, evidence-backed validation reports mapped to compliance frameworks — ISO 27001, SOC 2, NIST, Cyber Essentials — for auditors and boards.
Improve SOC detection engineering workflows
Equip detection engineers with ATT&CK-mapped gap analysis, rule coverage assessment, and simulation evidence to prioritize the detection engineering backlog.
Built for Security Teams
Who uses Breach and Attack Simulation?
CISO
Evidence-based prevention and detection rates, ATT&CK coverage trends, executive-ready risk reporting, and investment prioritization based on real simulation outcomes.
SOC Manager
Reduce missed detections, improve alert quality, prioritize tuning actions, and validate escalation workflows against continuously simulated adversary behaviors.
Detection Engineer
Identify ATT&CK coverage gaps, tune SIEM and EDR rules, validate new detection content, and confirm that remediation closes identified gaps with retest evidence.
Security Architect
Validate whether endpoint, email, network, and SIEM telemetry and detection logic work together across your security architecture as designed.
Red / Purple Team
Automate the known-technique baseline and free human operators for novel attack paths — using simulation results as the objective shared scoreboard for purple exercises.
Compliance / GRC
Generate repeatable validation evidence mapped to controls, compliance frameworks, risk reduction targets, and board-level cyber resilience reporting.
Controlled, Authorised, and Scope-Approved
Valitrix BAS is designed to run controlled, authorised simulations against scope-approved systems only. All simulated payloads are inert and designed to minimise disruption — triggering security controls without causing data loss, system instability, or service interruption. Simulations must follow your organisation's approved testing scope, change management window, and system authorisation process before execution.
Valitrix does not execute real malware, real credential theft, or self-propagating attack behavior. The distinction between safe behaviour simulation and destructive attack execution is a core principle of the platform.
Why Valitrix BAS
Evidence-first BAS, built for continuous improvement.
Evidence-first, not score-first
Every result is backed by real simulation evidence — blocked, detected, missed — not vendor benchmark scores or assumed coverage maps.
Continuous, not point-in-time
Valitrix runs simulations on an ongoing schedule, catching regression after every rule change, agent update, or architecture modification — not just on test days.
Full-stack validation across all control layers
Endpoint, email, network, and SIEM controls are validated together — so gaps in one layer are visible before they become an attacker's path through the next.
MITRE ATT&CK-mapped at technique granularity
Every simulation result maps to a specific ATT&CK tactic and technique ID — giving your whole team a shared, objective language for gaps and remediation.
Non-disruptive by design
All simulations use safe, inert artifacts with hard execution boundaries. No real malware, no destructive payloads, no service disruption — ever.
Useful for executives and engineers alike
Generate board-ready prevention and detection rate dashboards alongside granular detection engineering remediation guidance from the same simulation run.
BAS versus adjacent testing
Use the right method for the question you are asking.
A BAS platform is not a substitute for a skilled red team or a CVE scanner. It is the continuous layer that proves known techniques still fail or succeed against your live stack.
| Compared with | Valitrix BAS | The other method | How they fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Penetration testing | Continuous, automated coverage of known TTPs with retest evidence | Point-in-time, human-led hunt for novel paths and business-logic flaws | Complementary — BAS between engagements |
| Red teaming | Always-on technique baseline and shared purple-team scoreboard | Objective-driven, creative intrusion by skilled operators | Complementary — do not replace operators |
| Vulnerability scanning | Measures whether controls stop the technique in your live stack | Finds CVEs and misconfigurations that could be exploited | Complementary — scan finds holes, BAS tests the door |
| Adversarial exposure validation | Executes techniques and records control outcomes | Models how assets, identities, and misconfigurations chain toward targets | Complementary — paths vs control proof |
| Automated penetration testing | Inert, production-safe control validation and regression alerting | Often exploit-oriented, proving a path to compromise | Different intent — Valitrix is validation-first |
Deeper explainers: BAS vs pentest · BAS vs red team · BAS vs vulnerability scanning · BAS vs AEV.
Ransomware security validation
Simulate ransomware-style impact behaviours (for example ATT&CK T1486) against EDR policy, backup-adjacent detections, and SIEM correlation — without encrypting real data. See the dedicated guide on ransomware control validation.
Ransomware validation guideSimulation library and custom scenarios
Valitrix covers 200+ techniques across all 14 MITRE ATT&CK tactical categories. Teams can run library scenarios and scope custom simulations to the TTPs that matter for their sector — then retest after detection engineering changes.
MITRE ATT&CK coverageDeployment architecture
Lightweight agents install on Windows Server 2016+ / Windows 10/11, Linux (Debian, Ubuntu, RHEL, CentOS), and macOS 11+. Simulations stay inside authorised scope. AI-guided selection is available when you want context-aware prioritisation rather than a static pack.
AI-powered simulationFrequently Asked QuestionsBreach and Attack Simulation,
Breach and Attack Simulation,
explained.
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) is a category of security technology that continuously replicates real adversary techniques against your live security controls. Unlike penetration testing — which is point-in-time and manual — BAS runs continuously, alerting you to control degradation in real time before attackers can exploit it.
A BAS platform is the software system that schedules, executes, and reports on those simulations continuously — typically with agents or simulation points, an ATT&CK-mapped scenario library, control-layer coverage (endpoint, email, network, SIEM), and evidence that security, SOC, and GRC teams can act on. Valitrix is that platform: not a one-off test, and not a scanner.
Red teams are expensive, manual, and infrequent. A BAS platform like Valitrix runs automated, controlled simulations continuously — giving your security team the technique coverage of a red team at the frequency and scale your organisation needs, between human-led engagements.
Valitrix BAS validates endpoint controls (EDR, AV, EPP, XDR), email gateways (SEG, phishing detection, attachment controls), network security controls (egress filtering, C2 detection, segmentation, DNS security), and SIEM detection pipelines (log ingestion, correlation rules, alert quality, SOC investigation evidence).
Yes. Valitrix simulations are non-destructive. All techniques generate real telemetry without causing data loss, system instability, or service outages. Agents operate within strictly defined, scope-approved boundaries and use inert simulation artifacts — not real malware or destructive payloads.
Commercial BAS platforms are typically licensed annually, priced by the number of validated endpoints, users, or simulation scope. Valitrix pricing is scoped to your environment — contact sales for a quote. Open-source tools such as Atomic Red Team and MITRE CALDERA are free but require significant in-house effort to operate, maintain, and map results to controls.
Continuously. Controls drift every time an endpoint agent updates, a SIEM rule changes, or a new adversary technique emerges. Valitrix runs simulations on an ongoing schedule and alerts when a previously-passing control starts failing — point-in-time testing cannot catch that regression.
No — they are complementary. BAS gives you continuous, automated coverage of known adversary techniques. Penetration testers and red teams find novel attack paths and business-logic weaknesses that automation cannot. Most mature security programmes use BAS for continuous assurance between scheduled human-led engagements.
Vulnerability management scans for CVEs and misconfigurations — what could be exploited in theory. BAS tests what would actually happen: it executes the adversary technique and measures whether your controls prevented, detected, or missed it. A fully patched system can still fail detection. Mature programmes run both and use BAS results to prioritise vulnerabilities that are genuinely exploitable past deployed defenses.
Adversarial exposure validation typically models how attackers could chain misconfigurations, identities, and assets toward critical systems. A BAS platform executes controlled techniques against live controls and records whether those controls blocked, detected, logged, or missed the behaviour. Exposure analysis finds likely paths; BAS proves whether the controls on those paths actually work. They are complementary, not interchangeable.
No. Automated penetration testing usually attempts to exploit weaknesses and prove a path to compromise. Valitrix BAS is control-validation first: it uses inert, scope-approved simulations to measure prevention and detection outcomes without destructive exploitation. Teams that need both still keep a human-led pentest for novel paths and use BAS for continuous regression testing.
Valitrix agents support Windows (Server 2016+, Windows 10/11), Linux (Debian, Ubuntu, RHEL, CentOS), and macOS (11+). Mixed-OS campaigns can validate lateral movement across heterogeneous estates.
Explore the full Valitrix security validation platform
BAS works best when endpoint, email, network, and SIEM controls are validated together. Explore how every validation module contributes to a complete security posture picture.
See Breach and Attack Simulation in action
See what Valitrix finds in your environment.
Request a live Valitrix Breach and Attack Simulation demo and see how continuous, evidence-based attack simulation exposes detection gaps, control failures, and missed detections across your security stack.