Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[New Rule] Threshold rule to detect multiple different Mitre Tactics on the same host in the last 24h #1597

Closed
aarju opened this issue Oct 29, 2021 · 9 comments · Fixed by #2399
Assignees
Labels
backlog blocked Rule: New Proposal for new rule

Comments

@aarju
Copy link

aarju commented Oct 29, 2021

Description

A Threshold rule that looks for unique count of more than 2 different kibana.alert.rule.threat.tactic.name values for a single host.name in the last 24h and generates a critical alert when they are observed. This could be an indicator of an ongoing attack impacting multiple parts of the kill chain.

This is an example rule I created on my cluster
Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 14 53 37

Required Info

Target indexes

.siem-signals-*

Additional requirements

Detection rules need to be configured with kibana.alert.rule.threat.tactic.name as much as possible.

@aarju aarju added the Rule: New Proposal for new rule label Oct 29, 2021
@aarju
Copy link
Author

aarju commented Oct 29, 2021

A challenge I've run into with this is that several detection rules have 2 different Mitre ATT&CK tactics causing false positives

@aarju
Copy link
Author

aarju commented Nov 5, 2021

Within our environment this has worked pretty well. I increased the unique count of kibana.alert.rule.threat.tactic.name to >= 3 and I set the rule to run every hour with a 24h additional lookback. While not perfect, this has helped alert us to hosts that are at a higher risk due to multiple parts of the kill chain being seen.

@botelastic
Copy link

botelastic bot commented Jan 4, 2022

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@botelastic botelastic bot added the stale 60 days of inactivity label Jan 4, 2022
@aarju
Copy link
Author

aarju commented Jan 10, 2022

We've been running this detection rule on our production servers over the last few months and it has worked out really well.

@botelastic botelastic bot removed the stale 60 days of inactivity label Jan 10, 2022
@w0rk3r
Copy link
Contributor

w0rk3r commented Jan 10, 2022

Thanks for letting us know @aarju, I'll work in a PR for this in the next few days

@SHolzhauer
Copy link
Contributor

Came across this so created a PR for it; I left MITRE mapping out of this one as it triggers on others, which felt duplicate.
@aarju does this look like it matches with your logic/expectation?

@aarju
Copy link
Author

aarju commented Feb 4, 2022

Thanks for submitting the PR @SHolzhauer, the logic in that PR looks good to me.

@botelastic
Copy link

botelastic bot commented Apr 5, 2022

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@botelastic botelastic bot added the stale 60 days of inactivity label Apr 5, 2022
@botelastic
Copy link

botelastic bot commented Apr 12, 2022

This has been closed due to inactivity. If you feel this is an error, please re-open and include a justifying comment.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backlog blocked Rule: New Proposal for new rule
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants