MITRE CTI
ATT&CK-v18.0 open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on MITRE CTI's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
Summary
MITRE CTI is an open-source data repository that publishes the MITRE ATT&CKMITRE ATT&CKA publicly maintained knowledge base of adversary tactics and techniques observed in real attacks, maintained by MITRE. Cyber tools use it as a common taxonomy to classify, map, and communicate threat behavior. and CAPEC datasets in STIXSTIXStructured Threat Information Expression, a standard format for describing threats, indicators and their relationships. It helps organizations exchange threat intelligence in a usable form. 2.0 format for exchanging cyber threat intelligence. It is free to use, and it's consumed as a data feed rather than run as an application, typically pulled in through the python-stix2 library or parsed directly as JSON. It suits threat intel analysts, detection engineers, and tool builders who need machine-readable adversary tactics and attack-pattern data to feed into their own platforms rather than a standalone interface to browse. The README itself points elsewhere for newer work: it directs users wanting STIX 2.1STIX 2.1A JSON-based open standard maintained by OASIS for representing threat intelligence objects and relationships, letting cyber tools exchange indicators, actors, and TTPs in a common machine-readable format. to the separate attack-stix-data repository, noting that one has data-model improvements while this one continues to be maintained for STIX 2.0 consumers. Started in 2017 and still active, with 26 contributors and a release 16 days ago, though commit volume in the past year is modest.
How MITRE CTI helps
Which techniques and tactics has this adversary group used, based on my alert's threat actor tag?
looks up the actor by identifier in the ATT&CK STIX bundle and returns the linked technique and tactic objects, with the relationship type connecting them
How does a technique I found in my logs map to specific attack patterns I should check for in my application code?
cross-references the ATT&CK technique against the CAPEC dataset via the associated relationship objects, surfacing the exploit patterns tied to that technique
Which known weaknesses correspond to the attack pattern flagged in my code review?
follows the CAPEC entry's linkage to Common Weakness Enumeration identifiers embedded in the dataset, pointing to the underlying weakness category
Can I trust that the threat data my detection rules are built on is current with the latest ATT&CK release?
each object carries version and modified timestamps from the STIX bundle, so a rule built from an older pull shows its data is behind the latest published release
Is my platform's threat-intel ingestion pipeline reading the right schema version for the STIX objects it consumes?
the dataset is fixed at STIX 2.0, so a pipeline expecting 2.1 fields fails or misparses, and the mismatch traces back to which repository the data was pulled from
Which social-engineering or supply-chain patterns apply to a risk I'm assessing outside pure software exploitation?
the CAPEC dataset includes attack patterns tagged beyond application exploits, covering social engineering and supply chain, retrievable by the same identifier lookup
Languages
Command line
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for MITRE CTI, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail MITRE CTI puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
3 entries
No entries match these filters.
- October 20251
- May 20221
- January 20211
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in mitre/cti, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 5 +1 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 2 +1 joined · −1 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 100% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 3.3 days first maintainer reply 3.3 days
- Open backlog 18 of 174 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 18
- Contributors / month 0
- Commits / month 0
- Stars 2,139
- other 100%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Libraries its release ships
What its latest release locks, checked against known advisories.None of its release's images build from a lockfile we can read.
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.