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

fix the scope of some rules with dependencies #908

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 14, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion collection/keylog/log-keystrokes-via-application-hook.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ rule:
authors:
- michael.hunhoff@mandiant.com
scopes:
static: function
static: basic block
dynamic: call
att&ck:
- Collection::Input Capture::Keylogging [T1056.001]
Expand Down
11 changes: 5 additions & 6 deletions host-interaction/gui/set-application-hook.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,12 +5,11 @@ rule:
authors:
- michael.hunhoff@mandiant.com
scopes:
static: function
dynamic: thread
static: instruction
dynamic: call
examples:
- Practical Malware Analysis Lab 12-03.exe_:0x401000
features:
- and:
- or:
- api: user32.SetWindowsHookEx
- api: user32.UnhookWindowsHookEx
- or:
- api: user32.SetWindowsHookEx
- api: user32.UnhookWindowsHookEx
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ rule:
- moritz.raabe@mandiant.com
- michael.hunhoff@mandiant.com
scopes:
static: function
dynamic: unsupported # requires characteristic features
static: instruction
dynamic: call
Comment on lines +9 to +10
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

with the optional part we're targeting multiple API calls which won't work this way

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ah, right...

I'm inclined to remove the optional and let this be used as a dependency more widely. Thoughts?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

or relax scope to basic block

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd say it's fine to remove the optional block, how about we create a new rule with the LoadLibrary APIs (not sure if that's just noisy or helpful).

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removed in 0c7d1bd

att&ck:
- Execution::Shared Modules [T1129]
examples:
Expand Down
Loading