What If I was building an Offensive Security Capability

By ShadowBumble

“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo Da Vinci

Introduction

Every organisation in the world is either having or developing a Cyber Security Capability to protect that organisation. You can outsource by buying managed services, you can do a best of both worlds by combining managed services with inhouse capabilities or you can have everything inhouse. The implementation model can vary however the goal is the same. This blogpost will focus on a inhouse/hybride model, while not being restricted to a specific sector or type of organisation.

This blog started from a challenge question I received:

“What if you had the opportunity to build an Offensive Security capability within a large organization say, 50,000+ employees? How would you design it, and how would you manage it?” As a disclaimer, this scenario is purely hypothetical. It does not reflect my current employer or the work we do there. This is not a step-by-step guide or a recommendation to implement any specific tool or process. Rather, it is simply my perspective, thoughts and ideas on how I would approach building such a capability in a large organization. Consider it a collection of strategic ramblings from someone passionate about offensive security.

The Evolution of the “Blue Team”

When I first started in cybersecurity, a Security Operations Center, or SOC, was a very different place. It used to be a room full of screens and tired analysts working in tiers: Tier 1 handled alerts, Tier 2 dug deeper into suspicious activity, and Tier 3 tackled the really complex stuff. It was functional, but it wasn’t efficient. Analysts often drowned in alerts, processes were rigid, and knowledge stayed locked in silos.

Over the years, the cyber threat landscape changed. Attacks became faster, more targeted, and much harder to detect. The old tiered model couldn’t keep up. So, SOCs began to evolve. Instead of just watching and reacting, teams started to specialize. Incident Response professionals took charge when something went wrong, focusing on containing damage and restoring systems quickly. Forensic analysts started digging into digital evidence to understand how an attacker got in and what they did and Detection Engineers emerged, constantly improving the logic and tools that spot suspicious behavior in the first place.

Today, a modern SOC is much more collaborative, were the adoptation of automation is implemented to handle repetitive tasks, allowing analysts to focus on the more complex investigations. Different disciplines work side by side, sharing insights to stay one step ahead of attackers.

This collectively; or dance of disciplines, is reffered to as the “Blue Team”, the defenders.

The Evolution of the “Red Team”

The same goes for penetration testing, it was simple and direct. A client gave a scope, like this website or that subnet, you ran tools and manual checks, then delivered a report with findings and remediation steps. That model still has value, but as organisations got more complex and attacks became more targeted, the role of offensive security grew into a full discipline.

Mature offensive programs now include several specialist roles. Adversary emulation means recreating a specific attacker, with their tools and techniques, so defenders can see how they would fare against a real threat. Adversary simulation is similar but often runs continuously against many parts of the estate to test detection and response. Exploit development is about taking a weak spot and turning it into a reliable attack, which helps defenders understand worst case scenarios. The concept of Red teaming combines many of these skills into long, goal oriented engagements that test people, processes, and technology all at once.

Despite all that specialisation, the traditional penetration tester is still essential. Regular pen testers provide broad coverage, find common misconfigurations and business logic flaws, and validate fixes after remediation. They are specialists focussing on high risk, high impact concerns.

In a mature organisation these functions are coordinated. There is governance, clear rules of engagement, legal oversight, and integration with asset inventories and risk management. Automation and continuous testing feed findings into development pipelines so issues get fixed faster. Teams work with blue team counterparts in purple exercises to improve detection and response.

In short, offensive security was born and has shifted from discrete scoped tests to a layered ecosystem. Specialised experts emulating real attackers and building exploits, while regular penetration testers keep the day to day defenses healthy. Both are needed to reduce risk and improve resilience.

This collectively; or dance of disciplines, is reffered to as the “Red Team”, the Attackers.

What is a mature Offensive Security Capability

In most organizations looking to build or implement a mature Offensive Security capability, the initiative is usually driven by their Blue Team reaching a certain level of maturity. The Blue Team needs Offensive Security professionals to validate detections, generate telemetry, and test the organization’s defenses.

Where it used to be the Offensive Team pushing the boundaries of the Blue Team, we now see that, at least on an organizational level, the Blue Team is often ahead. The Blue Team today is typically well-structured, with multiple disciplines under the same umbrella, strict procedures, clear expectations, and defined lines of communication when incidents occur.

In contrast, many Offensive Teams still operate with lower maturity, they are less centralized, less structured, and sometimes lack clearly defined processes. It’s clear that Offensive Security, as a practice, is still facing some maturity challenges.

In the same way the Blue Team grew into a structured, multi-disciplinary unit, the Offensive Security team is now following a similar path, developing its own specialized functions and expert roles. The most common ones are: Penetration Testers, Adversary Emulation, Adversary Simulation, Exploit or Vulnerability Researchers.

If you want to focus on building a strong and mature Offensive Security function, you need to understand that it’s mostly about creativity and people. It’s about finding ways to break things, making systems behave in ways they weren’t designed to, and thinking beyond established guidelines, standards, and policies.

Closing Thoughts

The only remaining question of the challenge now is, “How would I manage that?” And the truth is, this is not something with a simple answer. It requires time, thoughtful planning, and a willingness to experiment. Having a structure on paper, making it scalable, and writing it down like this is relatively easy. The real challenge lies in implementing it, writing supporting documents, defining processes, setting clear responsibilities, and ensuring alignment with both team and organizational goals.

But this is also where the opportunity lies. By thinking strategically about how to organize Operational, Research, and Engineering teams in offensive security, you’re building a framework that allows your people to grow, learn, and take ownership. You’re creating a team that can adapt, scale, and innovate rather than just following instructions.

Ultimately, building and leading high-performing offensive security teams is less about frameworks on paper and more about empowering people, fostering growth, and creating clear paths for responsibility and innovation. Start small, think strategically, and focus on creating a culture where knowledge flows, ownership is clear, and careers can evolve. Structure is important, but action is what turns ideas into results, so take these concepts, adapt them to your organization, and begin shaping your team for the challenges ahead.

And that’s how I would do it.