UTIOM’s maturity ladder measures integration, threat realism, and engineering discipline.
| Level | Designation | Characteristics | Threat-Informed Capability | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Absent | Fragmented ownership,Weak Visibility | None | Chaos, alert fatigue |
| 1 | Reactive / Threat-Aware | Initial ATT&CK-aligned detections around CJs | Awareness | Context replaces noise |
| 2 | Structured / Threat-Informed | CJ-based visibility & versioned rules + Aligned TI35 | Intentional Design | Predictable defence |
| 3 | Integrated / Unified | Feedback ↔ Detection ↔ Strategy linked | Collaboration | Traceable operations |
| 4 | Adaptive / Engineering-Led | CI/CD + Purple Team loops | Automation | Rapid iteration & QA |
| 5 | Autonomous / Threat-Informed Automation | SOAR + Deception + Continuous Red/Purple teaming and validation | Intelligence | Self-optimizing SOC |
Each level builds both vertical (maturity) and horizontal (unification) growth.
Level 5 is aspirational and depends on business risk tolerance, automation safety, and organizational maturity.
Notes
- Threat Intelligence ↩
Cite this chapter:
← Back to book contents
Adineh, R. (2026). Threat-Informed Maturity Model. UTIOM Framework
Book, edition 1.2. utiom.de/book/maturity-model/