// detection scoring

Measure detection maturity, not just rule count

DetectionHunter scores every detection from 0–100 across seven categories. Confidence scoring turns 'we have a rule' into 'we know the rule works, why it works, and how an analyst will respond'.

// sample confidence score
Detect PowerShell EncodedCommand Abuse · T1059.001
Reference scoring across the seven DetectionHunter categories.
confidence
84
/ 100
Telemetry Coverage
weight 20
18/20

Is the required telemetry enabled, collected, and reaching the SIEM? Missing logs = blind detection.

Detection Accuracy
weight 20
17/20

Does the rule correctly identify the suspicious behavior across realistic variations?

Validation Proof
weight 15
14/15

Did a safe validation command produce logs that match the expected signature?

Context Strength
weight 15
12/15

Does the alert include parent process, user, host, command line, hashes, and related activity?

False Positive Risk
weight 10
7/10

How likely is the detection to trigger on normal admin or business behavior? Lower = better.

ATT&CK Alignment
weight 10
9/10

Is the detection mapped to the correct technique, sub-technique, and tactic?

Operational Readiness
weight 10
7/10

Can an analyst triage this alert end-to-end with the fields and notes provided?

// interpretation
85–100
Operational
70–84
Production-ready w/ tuning
50–69
Lab-validated, needs context
0–49
Prototype only