CYBERRAKSHAKLABS · RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

From Threat Signal
to Practical Defence.

Our research process turns real-world incidents into evidence-led intelligence, clear risk analysis and actions defenders can actually use.

THE RESEARCH FLOW
MONITORVERIFYINVESTIGATEMAPASSESSDEFEND
6Research stages
5Evidence labels
3Research depths
THE CYBERRAKSHAKLABS APPROACH

Research should reduce uncertainty — not repeat the headline.

Every investigation is built to answer five questions: What is known? What is uncertain? How could the attack work? Who is at risk? What should be done now?

THE SIX-STAGE PROCESS

Every investigation moves through a repeatable workflow.

Each stage adds a layer of confidence, context or defensive value before the research reaches the reader.

01 / SIGNAL
MONITOR

Find the signal.

Identify emerging incidents, vulnerabilities, campaigns, threat-actor activity and security warnings worth investigating.

02 / EVIDENCE
VERIFY

Separate fact from noise.

Distinguish public evidence, credible reporting, partial evidence, attacker claims and information that remains unconfirmed.

03 / ANALYSIS
INVESTIGATE

Understand the attack.

Analyse attack methods, exposed systems, infrastructure, malware behaviour, data involved, impact and observable indicators.

04 / CONTEXT
MAP

Put behaviour in context.

Map relevant behaviours to MITRE ATT&CK or other useful technical frameworks where the evidence supports the mapping.

05 / RISK
ASSESS

Turn evidence into risk.

Evaluate severity, exposure, likely consequences and what the incident means for organisations, defenders and everyday users.

06 / ACTION
DEFEND

End with action.

Convert findings into practical patching, detection, threat hunting, incident-response, identity, data-protection and awareness steps.

EVIDENCE DISCIPLINE

Not every claim gets the same confidence.

Research should make uncertainty visible. The evidence label tells the reader how strongly a statement is supported.

VERIFIED

Supported by reliable evidence

Confirmed through authoritative sources, technical evidence or multiple credible sources.

PARTIALLY VERIFIED

Evidence exists, but gaps remain

Important details are supported, while some elements cannot yet be independently confirmed.

UNDER INVESTIGATION

Still being assessed

The available information is insufficient for a firm conclusion and should be treated cautiously.

ACTIVE THREAT

Defenders should act now

Current exploitation, active campaigns or credible immediate exposure makes timely defensive action important.

ATTACKER CLAIM

Claimed by the threat actor

Leak-site or criminal-group claims are clearly labelled rather than presented as independently confirmed facts.

RESEARCH DEPTH

Not every threat needs the same size of investigation.

01 · THREAT ALERT500–800 words

Fast-moving warning, key risk, immediate actions and essential context.

03 · DEEP RESEARCH2,000–4,000+ words

Evidence review, technical investigation, attack chain, threat intelligence, risk analysis and detailed defence guidance.

THE CRL PRINCIPLE

We don't just ask, “What happened?”

We ask: What is known? What is uncertain? How could the attack work? Who is at risk? What should be done now?

“Good threat intelligence reduces uncertainty. Good cybersecurity research turns that intelligence into action.”
THE END GOAL

Understand the threat. Detect the risk. Strengthen the defence.

Good threat intelligence becomes valuable when it changes a decision, improves detection or helps someone avoid becoming the next victim.

THINK
VERIFY
DEFEND