Essential Work Sample Exercises for Hiring Top Threat Detection Engineers

In today's rapidly evolving threat landscape, hiring the right Threat Detection Engineer can make the difference between a secure organization and one vulnerable to costly breaches. These cybersecurity professionals serve as the frontline defenders of your digital assets, requiring a unique blend of technical expertise, analytical thinking, and collaborative skills that can be difficult to assess through traditional interviews alone.

Work samples and technical skill evaluations provide a window into how candidates actually approach security challenges, not just how they talk about them. By observing candidates in action—analyzing logs, creating detection rules, or explaining security concepts—you gain invaluable insights into their real-world capabilities and problem-solving approaches.

The most effective Threat Detection Engineers combine technical proficiency with investigative instincts and clear communication. They must be able to identify subtle patterns in vast amounts of data, develop effective detection mechanisms, and collaborate with various teams to strengthen your security posture. Traditional interviews often fail to reveal these critical abilities.

The following exercises are designed to evaluate the core competencies required for success in this role: security log analysis, detection rule creation, automation skills, and the ability to communicate complex security concepts clearly. Each exercise simulates real-world scenarios that Threat Detection Engineers face daily, providing you with concrete evidence of a candidate's capabilities.

By implementing these carefully crafted work samples in your hiring process, you'll be able to identify candidates who not only possess the technical knowledge but also demonstrate the analytical thinking, attention to detail, and communication skills necessary to excel as a Threat Detection Engineer in your organization.

Activity #1: Security Log Analysis and Incident Investigation

This exercise evaluates a candidate's ability to analyze security logs, identify potential threats, and investigate security incidents—core responsibilities for any Threat Detection Engineer. By presenting candidates with realistic log data containing suspicious patterns, you can assess their analytical skills, attention to detail, and investigative approach when confronted with potential security threats.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a sanitized dataset of security logs (from SIEM tools like Splunk, QRadar, or Microsoft Sentinel) containing evidence of a specific attack pattern (e.g., a brute force attempt, lateral movement, or data exfiltration).
• Include both relevant and irrelevant log entries to test the candidate's ability to filter noise.
• Provide access to a sandbox environment of your SIEM tool, or alternatively, provide the logs in CSV format that can be analyzed with common tools.
• Allocate 45-60 minutes for this exercise.
• Prepare a brief document explaining the environment context (network architecture, assets involved, normal baseline activity).

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the provided security logs and identify any suspicious or anomalous activities.
• Document your investigation process, including:
• What indicators of compromise or suspicious patterns you identified
• Your methodology for analyzing the logs
• What additional data you would request if this were a real investigation
• Prepare a brief summary of your findings, including:
• The nature of the potential security incident
• The affected systems or users
• Recommended immediate actions to contain the threat
• Be prepared to explain your analysis approach and reasoning.

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the candidate presents their findings, provide feedback on one aspect they handled well (e.g., thorough methodology, attention to specific indicators) and one area for improvement (e.g., missed a key indicator, could have used a more efficient analysis technique).
• Ask the candidate to explain how they would adjust their approach based on the improvement feedback, or have them demonstrate an alternative analysis method on a small subset of the data.

Activity #2: Detection Rule Development

This exercise assesses a candidate's ability to translate threat intelligence into actionable detection rules—a critical skill for proactively identifying security threats. By asking candidates to develop detection rules for specific attack scenarios, you can evaluate their understanding of threat behaviors, knowledge of detection technologies, and ability to balance detection efficacy with false positive reduction.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a brief on a specific threat scenario (e.g., a recently disclosed vulnerability, a known attack technique, or an emerging threat actor's tactics).
• Include relevant technical details about the threat, such as indicators of compromise, attack patterns, or affected systems.
• Specify which detection technology the rule should be written for (e.g., Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Elastic, Suricata).
• Provide documentation or reference materials for the specified detection technology.
• Allow 45-60 minutes for this exercise.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the threat scenario information provided.
• Develop one or more detection rules that would effectively identify this threat in your environment.
• Document your rule(s) with:
• The actual rule syntax for the specified platform
• An explanation of what the rule detects and how it works
• Any potential limitations or false positive scenarios
• Recommendations for tuning or improving the rule over time
• Be prepared to explain your approach to rule development and how you balanced detection efficacy with false positive reduction.

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the candidate presents their detection rule(s), provide feedback on one strength (e.g., effective logic, good false positive handling) and one area for improvement (e.g., rule could be more specific, missed an evasion technique).
• Ask the candidate to refine their rule based on the feedback, focusing specifically on addressing the improvement area identified.

Activity #3: Security Automation Script Development

This exercise evaluates a candidate's ability to automate security tasks using scripting languages—an essential skill for improving efficiency and consistency in threat detection. By having candidates develop a script to solve a specific security automation challenge, you can assess their programming skills, understanding of security concepts, and ability to create practical solutions that enhance security operations.

Directions for the Company:

• Define a realistic security automation task that could be solved with a script (e.g., parsing and analyzing logs, enriching alerts with threat intelligence, automating response actions).
• Specify the preferred scripting language (Python or PowerShell are common choices for security automation).
• Provide any necessary sample data files, API documentation, or other resources needed to complete the task.
• Allow 60-90 minutes for this exercise, depending on complexity.
• Prepare a development environment or allow candidates to use their own tools.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Develop a script that accomplishes the specified security automation task.
• Your script should:
• Be well-structured and include appropriate error handling
• Include comments explaining your approach and any key decisions
• Be efficient and follow best practices for the chosen language
• Prepare to demonstrate your script and explain:
• How your solution works
• Any assumptions you made
• How your script could be extended or improved in the future
• How this automation would benefit security operations

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the candidate demonstrates their script, provide feedback on one strength (e.g., elegant solution, good error handling) and one area for improvement (e.g., could be more efficient, missing a key feature).
• Ask the candidate to implement a small enhancement or fix based on your feedback, focusing on a specific aspect of the code that could be improved.

Activity #4: Security Findings Communication Exercise

This exercise assesses a candidate's ability to communicate complex security concepts to different stakeholders—a crucial skill for ensuring that security findings lead to appropriate actions. By having candidates translate technical findings into clear communications for different audiences, you can evaluate their communication skills, stakeholder management abilities, and effectiveness in driving security improvements across the organization.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a detailed technical security finding document (e.g., a vulnerability assessment report, a threat hunting summary, or an incident analysis).
• Define two different audiences that would need to be informed about this finding:

1. A technical audience (e.g., IT operations team or security team)
2. A non-technical audience (e.g., executive leadership or business stakeholders)

• Provide any relevant organizational context that might influence communication approach.
• Allow 45-60 minutes for preparation.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the technical security finding provided.
• Prepare two different communications about this finding:

1. A technical briefing (5-7 minutes) for the security or IT team that includes:
   • Detailed technical explanation of the finding
   • Evidence supporting the finding
   • Technical recommendations for remediation
2. An executive summary (3-5 minutes) for non-technical stakeholders that includes:
   • Business impact of the finding
   • Risk assessment in business terms
   • High-level recommendations and required resources

• Be prepared to deliver both communications and answer questions from each perspective.

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the candidate delivers both communications, provide feedback on one strength (e.g., clear explanation of complex concepts, effective prioritization) and one area for improvement (e.g., too technical for the executive audience, missing key business impacts).
• Ask the candidate to revise a specific portion of one of their communications based on your feedback, focusing on how they would adjust their approach to better meet the needs of that audience.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: How should we weigh technical skills versus communication abilities when evaluating Threat Detection Engineer candidates?

A: While technical proficiency is essential, effective Threat Detection Engineers must also communicate their findings clearly. A candidate who excels technically but struggles to explain their work may have difficulty collaborating with other teams or gaining buy-in for security initiatives. Aim for a balance, with slightly more weight (perhaps 60-70%) on technical skills for junior roles, and more equal weighting for senior positions where influence and collaboration become increasingly important.

Q: Should we provide candidates with access to our actual security tools for these exercises?

A: Ideally, provide access to sandbox environments of the tools you use (Splunk, QRadar, etc.) to assess familiarity with your specific technology stack. However, if this isn't feasible, focus exercises on fundamental skills that transfer across tools, such as log analysis concepts, detection logic, or scripting abilities. You can also use open-source alternatives or provide data in formats that can be analyzed with common tools.

Q: How much preparation time should we give candidates for these exercises?

A: For log analysis and rule development exercises, providing the task during the interview is appropriate as it tests real-time problem-solving. For the automation script and communication exercises, consider giving candidates 24-48 hours of preparation time. This approach better simulates real-world conditions where engineers have time to research and develop solutions, while still testing their abilities under reasonable constraints.

Q: How can we ensure these exercises don't disadvantage candidates from different backgrounds or with different specializations within security?

A: Design exercises with multiple valid approaches and clearly communicate that you're evaluating thought process and problem-solving as much as specific technical knowledge. Provide sufficient context and resources so candidates unfamiliar with your exact tools can still demonstrate their capabilities. Consider offering candidates a choice between comparable exercises that might better align with their experience, while still testing the same core competencies.

Q: How do we balance the thoroughness of these exercises with respect for candidates' time?

A: Be mindful of the total time commitment you're asking of candidates. Consider spreading exercises across different interview stages rather than requiring all in a single session. For more complex exercises, consider compensating candidates for their time, especially for take-home assignments. Always provide clear time expectations upfront and design exercises that can demonstrate competency without requiring excessive time investment.

In today's complex threat landscape, finding the right Threat Detection Engineer requires going beyond traditional interviews to assess how candidates actually approach security challenges. By implementing these practical work samples in your hiring process, you'll gain valuable insights into candidates' technical abilities, analytical thinking, and communication skills—all essential for success in this critical role.

Remember that the best candidates will not only demonstrate technical proficiency but also show curiosity, adaptability, and a security-focused mindset. These qualities, combined with the specific skills evaluated in these exercises, will help you identify Threat Detection Engineers who can truly strengthen your organization's security posture.

Ready to take your hiring process to the next level? Yardstick offers AI-powered tools to help you create customized job descriptions, interview questions, and comprehensive interview guides tailored to your specific needs. Check out our example job description for Threat Detection Engineers to get started.

Build a complete interview guide for this role by signing up for a free Yardstick account: Sign up now