A red team is a specialized group that emulates real-world adversaries to test an organization’s security defenses. Using offensive techniques and tactics, the red team simulates cyberattacks to uncover vulnerabilities and evaluate how effectively defenses can detect, respond to, and contain threats. Unlike traditional vulnerability assessments or penetration tests, red team exercises mirror the full attack lifecycle—from reconnaissance and exploitation to lateral movement, providing a realistic measure of an organization’s resilience.
The blue team serves as the defender, responsible for detecting, responding to, and mitigating these simulated attacks while maintaining overall security posture. Working in a continuous feedback loop, the red and blue teams turn offensive findings into defensive improvements, helping organizations build stronger, more adaptive, and resilient security programs.
How they work together:
This is part of a series of articles about red teaming
The red team aims to simulate the tactics of real adversaries to uncover weak points that attackers could exploit. Their mission is not just to find technical flaws but to test the organization’s overall security posture, including processes and human factors. By operating covertly and using penetration testing techniques, they aim to demonstrate how far an attacker could go if undetected and what the consequences would be. This allows organizations to see their defenses from an attacker’s perspective and prioritize remediation of critical risks.
The blue team’s objective is to defend the organization’s systems, networks, and data against attacks, whether simulated or real. They focus on maintaining availability, integrity, and confidentiality while reducing the time between compromise and detection. The mission of a blue team goes beyond stopping intrusions, it also includes strengthening the environment and security controls against future attempts. They aim to create a resilient defense system that can adapt as new threats emerge.
Red teams perform a range of offensive activities that simulate how real attackers operate. These include reconnaissance to map targets, exploiting vulnerabilities in applications and infrastructure, escalating privileges, and moving laterally through networks. They also test the human layer through phishing campaigns, phone-based social engineering, and attempts to bypass physical security. Their operations typically follow a defined set of objectives, such as gaining access to sensitive systems or exfiltrating data, all while avoiding detection to measure the true effectiveness of defenses.
Blue teams focus on defensive and protective actions. They constantly monitor security alerts, correlate threat data, and analyze logs to identify unusual activity. When incidents occur, a blue team carries out containment, eradication, and recovery procedures. They also proactively hunt for threats that may not trigger alerts, study attack patterns, and apply patches or configuration changes to close vulnerabilities. Their work is ongoing, with continuous assessment and improvement of security controls
Red teams employ offensive security tools and custom-built exploits to simulate real-world threats. They may use penetration testing frameworks like Metasploit, adversary emulation platforms like Cobalt Strike, and command-and-control (C2) servers to maintain persistence. Techniques include exploiting unpatched vulnerabilities, creating phishing emails with payloads, credential harvesting, and bypassing endpoint protections. Some red teams also use hardware-based tools for physical intrusion testing, such as RFID cloners or rogue wireless access points.
Blue teams rely on a set of defensive technologies. They use SIEM (security information and event management) platforms to centralize log data and detect patterns of malicious behavior. Endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions help identify and stop suspicious activity on hosts. Firewalls, intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS), and network monitoring tools provide perimeter and internal visibility. Threat intelligence feeds inform them about emerging attack techniques, while vulnerability scanners help identify weak configurations before attackers can exploit them.
Learn more in our detailed guide to red teaming tools
Red team professionals require deep technical knowledge of offensive security and adversarial behavior. They must understand network protocols, operating system internals, exploit development, and persistence techniques. In addition, they need creativity to simulate advanced persistent threat actors who adapt tactics as defenses evolve. Strong problem-solving skills and the ability to think like attackers are critical. Many red team members also have skills in social engineering and physical security testing, making them versatile in both technical and non-technical attack vectors.
Blue team members need a defensive mindset and expertise in threat detection, analysis, and incident response. They must be skilled in log correlation, malware analysis, and forensic investigation. Strong knowledge of operating systems, networking, and security frameworks is required to recognize and counter threats effectively. In addition, they need the ability to prioritize alerts, act quickly under pressure, and communicate clearly with stakeholders. Soft skills like teamwork and continuous learning are essential since defensive strategies must evolve as attackers change tactics.
Red team exercises are used to assess how prepared an organization is against advanced and persistent threats. They are often conducted to validate whether security investments are effective, test the speed and accuracy of incident response, and identify weak spots in both technology and human processes. They are particularly valuable before major product launches, compliance audits, or when organizations want to evaluate resilience against nation-state-level adversaries.
Blue team operations are central to the day-to-day security of an organization. They ensure systems remain protected against common and emerging threats, respond to intrusions, and provide assurance to stakeholders that risks are managed. They are critical for organizations that handle sensitive data, such as healthcare, finance, or government sectors. Beyond responding to incidents, blue teams play a long-term role in strengthening defenses by learning from attacks, applying lessons, and ensuring the organization adapts to a constantly changing threat landscape.
Dima Potekhin, CTO and Co-Founder of CyCognito, is an expert in mass-scale data analysis and security. He is an autodidact who has been coding since the age of nine and holds four patents that include processes for large content delivery networks (CDNs) and internet-scale infrastructure.
In my experience, here are tips that can help you better elevate your red and blue team exercises beyond standard practices:
The concept of a purple team does not describe a separate group but rather a collaborative approach between red and blue teams. Its goal is to close the gap between offensive and defensive operations by ensuring that insights from one side directly inform the other. In practice, this means that when the red team discovers a weakness or successfully carries out an attack simulation, the blue team immediately learns from it and adapts detection and response strategies.
A purple team often involves structured exercises where the red team demonstrates specific attack techniques while the blue team observes and tunes defenses in real time. This shortens the feedback loop, enabling faster improvement of detection rules, incident response playbooks, and overall defensive resilience. A major benefit of a purple team is that it ensures both teams operate with shared objectives instead of working in silos.
Organizations benefit from having a purple team by making security testing and defense improvements more iterative. Instead of waiting for the end of a red team engagement to analyze results, lessons are integrated continuously. The purple team approach strengthens the ability to detect real-world adversaries and reduces the dwell time of attacks, leading to a more adaptive and mature security posture.
For red and blue team exercises to deliver real value, senior leadership must be actively involved. Executive sponsorship ensures that the exercise is aligned with organizational priorities and not treated as a side project for the security team. Leadership support provides authority to dedicate time, budget, and personnel without pushback from other departments. It also helps ensure that findings are taken seriously and result in organizational changes, rather than being dismissed as purely technical issues.
Without sponsorship, there is a risk that exercises become “check-the-box” activities with limited follow-up. In practice, this means executives should be briefed on the goals of the exercise, updated on progress, and involved in reviewing outcomes. Their buy-in is critical for converting identified weaknesses into funded remediation projects and long-term security improvements.
A common mistake in red and blue teaming is conducting broad exercises without clear goals, which leads to ambiguous results. Objectives must be specific and measurable, such as testing how quickly the blue team detects lateral movement, or whether phishing defenses prevent initial compromise. The scope should clearly define what is in and out of bounds, including networks, applications, or business units. This prevents wasted effort on areas that are not critical and avoids disrupting systems that are sensitive to downtime.
Scoping also allows the exercise to simulate realistic attack paths without creating unnecessary risk. For example, if the objective is to test the security of payment systems, the scope should include associated servers, endpoints, and staff—but exclude unrelated infrastructure. Clear objectives and scope keep the exercise focused, ensure both teams share the same expectations, and enable meaningful evaluation of results.
Rules of engagement are essential to ensure safety, legality, and fairness in red and blue team exercises. They specify what kinds of attacks are allowed, which systems can be targeted, and which actions are prohibited. For example, rules may forbid denial-of-service attacks that could disrupt customer-facing services, or they may restrict access to production data. ROE also outlines communication protocols, such as who to contact in case of unintended disruption, and what level of transparency the blue team will have about the red team’s activities.
Boundaries prevent the exercise from escalating into uncontrolled activity that could harm the business. They also protect teams from accusations of misconduct or unauthorized access. Well-documented ROE builds trust between participants and provides a framework for resolving disputes if disagreements arise during or after the exercise.
Testing in live production systems carries real risks, including outages, data corruption, or unintended service disruptions. To reduce these risks, many organizations set up controlled environments that closely resemble production networks but operate independently. These testbeds allow red teams to deploy exploits, malware, or persistence mechanisms without endangering real users or business operations.
When production testing is necessary to achieve realistic results, safety measures must be implemented. This includes staged execution of attacks, the use of monitoring checkpoints, and clear escalation procedures to stop the test if harmful effects occur. Controlled environments also provide opportunities for repeatable testing, where attack and defense scenarios can be recreated to validate improvements. A balance must be struck between realism and safety—too much isolation reduces relevance, but too little control increases risk.
The most important outcome of any exercise is the knowledge gained, not the exercise itself. Findings must be captured in detailed reports that describe vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, or procedural weaknesses observed during the test. Each finding should include supporting evidence, such as logs, screenshots, or attack paths, to ensure credibility. Reports should go beyond identifying problems and provide practical recommendations for remediation. Prioritization is key: not all findings carry the same level of risk, so organizations should rank them by potential impact and likelihood of exploitation.
Acting on these findings requires coordination across IT, security, and business teams to implement fixes, update processes, and verify that weaknesses are resolved. Ideally, follow-up exercises should confirm whether corrective measures have improved defenses. Without thorough documentation and action, the value of red and blue teaming is lost, as the same vulnerabilities may persist and be exploited by real adversaries.
CyCognito is an external exposure management platform that helps organizations see and test their attack surface the same way an adversary would. It continuously discovers and maps every internet-facing asset—across cloud environments, subsidiaries, SaaS platforms, and third-party ecosystems—and actively tests them for vulnerabilities and misconfigurations. This outside-in perspective gives red and blue teams a common, verified view of what is truly exposed to attackers in real time.
For red teams, CyCognito accelerates reconnaissance and vulnerability validation by automating large portions of the external discovery and mapping process. Instead of manually hunting for unknown or shadow assets, red teams can focus their efforts on strategic attack paths and exploit development. The platform’s built-in active security testing capabilities, including dynamic application security testing (DAST) and over 90,000 pentesting modules, simulate real-world attacker behavior and provide evidence of exploitability—essential for planning realistic offensive exercises.
For blue teams, CyCognito delivers continuous external visibility and prioritized risk intelligence. Findings are automatically validated, enriched with business context, and mapped to ownership, making it easier for defenders to triage, assign, and remediate issues that pose genuine risk. Integrations with workflow and security tools such as Jira, ServiceNow, and SIEM platforms ensure exposures move seamlessly into existing operational processes.
By bridging the gap between red and blue team activities, CyCognito enables a more coordinated and data-driven security improvement cycle. Red teams gain verified external targets and exploit evidence for their simulations, while blue teams gain visibility into real-world exposures and can measure the effectiveness of their defenses against validated threats. The result is a unified, continuously improving security program that turns attacker insight into actionable defense.
Download this white paper to uncover the challenges with pen testing in reducing external risk, how automation can help pen testers and red teams work more efficiently, and how CyCognito can add value.
Complimentary White Paper