Cybrary ForgeCYBRARY / FORGE
← All product lines

Forge Playbook Builder

Write a response playbook, compile it, and see where it stops for a person.

What is in it

For soar engineer, automation lead, detection engineer — prove a playbook does what it says before it touches anything.

  • Plain-line authoring compiled by the same engine the graded cases run
  • A debugger that names unreachable steps, missing gates and what the run would write
  • Every pause for a human listed before the first step runs
  • Only actions the engine can really execute compile — the rest are errors on purpose

What it is not

  • It drives the simulated estate, not your production SOAR platform
  • No connector marketplace: integrations are modeled, including their failures

Forge Playbook Builder against the field

19 capabilities that matter for this purchase, next to the platforms a buyer shortlists in this lane: Tines, Torq, Splunk SOAR, Palo Alto XSOAR. Tines, Torq, Splunk SOAR, Palo Alto XSOAR sit outside the eight-vendor research, so they carry no marks below — named for honesty, not scored.

  • You build automation against a simulated estate that fails realistically, so people learn recovery, not happy paths.
  • Not a production SOAR license — and we say so rather than competing with one.
Forge Playbook Builder capability comparison against 0 platforms
What you needForge Playbook BuilderIncluded in the platform
SOC investigation exercise
Alert triage with true and false positive decisionsEvery case ships with innocent lookalikes so closing everything scores badly.
SIEM query and investigation practice
Endpoint analysis and access
Threat hunting kept separate from alert triage
Investigation that crosses multiple toolsOne estate behind SIEM, EDR, case service, network devices and the wire.
Analyst report or evidence submission
Measured investigation and response timingDwell time, containment time and SLA clocks are scored, not just recorded.
Detection-engineering curriculum
SOAR concepts and workflow training
Learner authors an executable SOAR playbookDeliberately stricter than the row above: a SOAR-looking screen is not a runtime.Draft, run, fail, repair and rerun against the live estate, with an audit trail.
Connector failure and replay debugger for automationDeterministic integration faults with idempotent retries. Not established for any vendor in the research.
Configuration changes alter the exerciseFirewall, routing and policy edits change what the wire and the SIEM then show.
Tests a customer's deployed security controls
By design, no
Different business, different liability. Partner rather than relabel.
Managed continuous validation service
By design, no
Customer-specific production adversary scenarios
By design, no
Retest remediation against actual defenses
By design, no
We teach analysts to read and act on validation evidence; we do not produce it.
Rogue access point owned by the estate, not scripted
Each scenario carries its own SIEM, alerts and case databaseNo shared global console: an alert raises a case on the estate it came from, and cannot leak into another team's exercise.

The run behind this line: Containment under a running clock

A playbook bench: the intrusion is live, and the deliverable is automation that contains it without breaking the business.

Opponent: Intruder moving fast enough that manual response loses. Shaped after Response timelines from published hands-on-keyboard intrusion reports. Technique and zone identifiers are published by MITRE and ISA/IEC; the mapping is ours and is not an accreditation.

How it starts — the message delivered to the mailbox

From
Managed Detection Partner <alerts@mdr-partner.example>
Subject
P1: confirmed hands-on-keyboard activity on FIN-WS-04
  • This one is genuine — the pressure is real and the clock is already running
  • It names the host but not the account, so scope is still yours to establish
  • It hands the destructive action to you deliberately

Graded verdict: legit — T1078. Nothing here sends or resolves anywhere real.

The steps, and the zone each one crosses

#TacticATT&CKOn the rangeIEC 62443 zone
1Credential accessT1078 Valid accountsA stolen account is already interactive on a finance workstation.Identity
2Lateral movementT1021.001 Remote desktop protocolThe session hops to a second host over RDP while you build the playbook.Enterprise
3ExfiltrationT1048 Exfiltration over alternative protocolFiles start leaving over an outbound channel the firewall still allows.Enterprise

Zones in this run: Enterprise (Purdue level 4/5, via Internet mail and web egress); Identity (Purdue level 4, via LDAP and Kerberos to the domain controllers). How the zone model is used.

The alerts the SIEM raises from this run

  • Interactive logon by a service-class account

    Logon type 10 for an account whose role never logs on interactively.

    directory audit · stage 1 · LINE-PLAYBOOK-01 · T1078

  • RDP between two workstations

    Workstation-to-workstation 3389, which the build never needs.

    network sensor · stage 2 · LINE-PLAYBOOK-02 · T1021.001

  • Large outbound transfer on an unusual port

    Sustained egress on a port with no business history.

    network sensor · stage 3 · LINE-PLAYBOOK-03 · T1048

What the case has to hold before it closes

  • Every step the playbook takes, and which ones pause for a human
  • The isolation action and the business impact it carries
  • Proof that each automated step did what it claimed
  • The step that would have run against the wrong host, and the gate you added

Start learning this line

Containment under time pressure — the step most playbooks get wrong.

Start the lab

A tick means the other platform's own documentation shows it. A question mark means we could not confirm it publicly — it is never a claim that they lack it. Every Forge yes opens the working screen rather than a screenshot.