Threat Modeling Studio

Interactive university lab for STRIDE, DREAD, PASTA, VAST, Trike, attack trees, abuse cases, and misuse cases. Students can analyze a realistic system, score threats, design mitigations, and compare modeling methods.

1. What threat modeling does

Threat modeling is a structured way to identify what can go wrong in a system, estimate the significance of those threats, and choose controls before an attacker turns a design weakness into an incident.

Core idea: understand the system, identify assets and trust boundaries, enumerate threats, estimate risk, choose mitigations, and document residual risk.

Learning objectives

By the end of this lab, a student should be able to distinguish major threat-modeling approaches, apply STRIDE to system components and data flows, use DREAD-like numerical scoring, construct an attack tree, and write abuse and misuse cases that lead to concrete security requirements.

Recommended sequence
45–90 min

Tutorial → system model → STRIDE → scoring → process models → attack tree → abuse/misuse cases → quiz.

2. Framework quick reference

STRIDE Enumeration

Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information disclosure, Denial of service, Elevation of privilege.

Best for systematic identification of threat categories across components, identities, processes, stores, and flows.

DREAD Scoring

Damage, Reproducibility, Exploitability, Affected users, Discoverability.

Useful pedagogically for understanding risk scoring. Many teams now prefer likelihood/impact matrices or organizational risk models because DREAD scoring can be subjective.

PASTA Risk-centric

Process for Attack Simulation and Threat Analysis. A staged methodology that ties business objectives to technical attack analysis.

VAST Scale

Visual, Agile, and Simple Threat modeling. Emphasizes scalable modeling for development and operational perspectives.

Trike Risk management

Focuses on actors, assets, allowed actions, requirements, threats, and explicit risk management decisions.

Attack Trees Adversary path

Represent an attacker goal as a tree of possible sub-goals and techniques using AND/OR decomposition.

Abuse Cases Attacker stories

Describe how a malicious or negligent actor could misuse system functionality to harm an asset or stakeholder.

Misuse Cases Negative use cases

Describe undesirable interactions the system must prevent, often paired directly with security requirements and countermeasures.

3. System model: University Research Portal

Use the following fictional system throughout the lab. It stores research papers, grant documents, intellectual property, student records, and unpublished experimental data.

Trust boundaries: Internet ↔ Web/API tier; Web/API tier ↔ internal data services; identity provider ↔ application; admin network ↔ production.

4. STRIDE threat enumeration lab

Select a component, choose a STRIDE category, and describe one plausible threat. The tool will suggest typical security properties and mitigations.


Threat register

No threats added yet.

5. DREAD scoring exercise

Move each slider from 1 to 10. The average is shown as a simple comparative score. This is a learning aid, not a substitute for a formally calibrated organizational risk model.

DREAD average
5.0

6. PASTA guided walkthrough

PASTA connects business context to attack simulation. Work through each stage and record one short observation.

1. Define objectives2. Define technical scope3. Decompose application4. Analyze threats5. Analyze vulnerabilities6. Model attacks7. Analyze risk/impact

7. VAST modeling exercise

VAST commonly separates application-focused modeling from operational/infrastructure modeling. Classify each issue into the perspective that best fits it.

Application model examples

API authorization bug · insecure session handling · missing input validation · improper object-level authorization · insecure business logic.

Operational model examples

Overly permissive firewall rule · exposed admin service · shared production account · flat network · unmonitored privileged access.

8. Trike-style actor / asset / action matrix

Decide whether an actor should be allowed to perform an action on an asset. Then identify the threat if that authorization rule is violated.

No decisions recorded.

9. Interactive attack tree

Goal: Exfiltrate unpublished research data. Add attacker paths. Use OR branches for alternative ways to achieve a goal and AND branches when multiple conditions are required.

Think like an adversary: credential theft, session hijacking, application exploit, cloud-storage misconfiguration, malicious insider, endpoint compromise, or backup theft.

10. Abuse cases and misuse cases

Abuse case builder

Misuse-to-requirement translator

Enter a misuse statement and generate counter-requirements.
Generated abuse case will appear here.

11. Compare the approaches

MethodPrimary purposeStrongest useCommon limitation
STRIDEThreat enumerationSystematic category coverageDoes not itself quantify business risk
DREADRelative scoringTeaching and comparative prioritizationSubjective scores; inconsistent calibration
PASTARisk-centric processConnecting business impact to technical attack analysisMore process-heavy than lightweight workshops
VASTScalable organizational modelingAgile/DevSecOps scale and application + operational viewsMay require tooling/process integration for enterprise scale
TrikeRisk management and authorization analysisActor/asset/action reasoning and explicit acceptable riskLess commonly encountered than STRIDE in many organizations
Attack treeAdversary path decompositionExploring alternate attack routes and required conditionsCan grow rapidly and become difficult to maintain
Abuse caseAdversarial narrativeSecurity requirements from attacker behaviorCoverage depends heavily on analyst creativity
Misuse caseNegative system interactionLinking unwanted behavior to countermeasuresCan become anecdotal without systematic enumeration
Key lesson: these methods are complementary. A mature exercise might use a data-flow diagram + STRIDE for coverage, PASTA for business/attack context, attack trees for adversary pathways, and abuse/misuse cases to derive security requirements.

12. Student knowledge check

13. Instructor challenge

Ask students to repeat the exercise for one of these systems:

Hospital patient portal
PHI, identity, availability, ransomware, insider access.
Defense DevSecOps pipeline
Source code, CI/CD, containers, build integrity, secrets, software supply chain.
Mobile banking app
Credential theft, API abuse, fraudulent transactions, device compromise.

Student deliverable: one diagram, one STRIDE table, one prioritized threat list, one attack tree, two abuse/misuse cases, and at least five mitigations mapped to threats.

14. Suggested references

For further study, consult Microsoft threat-modeling guidance, OWASP Threat Modeling, NIST risk-management publications, MITRE ATT&CK, and your organization’s secure software development and risk-management standards. This lab intentionally teaches concepts rather than locking students into a single proprietary modeling tool.