toolsmith #128 – DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R – Part 1

“To competently perform rectifying security service, two critical incident response elements are necessary: information and organization.” ~ Robert E. Davis

I’ve been presenting DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R across the country at various conference venues and thought it would helpful to provide details for readers.
The basic premise?
Incident responders and investigators need all the help they can get.
Let me lay just a few statistics on you, from Secure360.org’s The Challenges of Incident Response, Nov 2016. Per their respondents in a survey of security professionals:

  • 38% reported an increase in the number of hours devoted to incident response
  • 42% reported an increase in the volume of incident response data collected
  • 39% indicated an increase in the volume of security alerts

In short, according to Nathan Burke, “It’s just not mathematically possible for companies to hire a large enough staff to investigate tens of thousands of alerts per month, nor would it make sense.”
The 2017 SANS Incident Response Survey, compiled by Matt Bromiley in June, reminds us that “2016 brought unprecedented events that impacted the cyber security industry, including a myriad of events that raised issues with multiple nation-state attackers, a tumultuous election and numerous government investigations.” Further, “seemingly continuous leaks and data dumps brought new concerns about malware, privacy and government overreach to the surface.”
Finally, the survey shows that IR teams are:

  • Detecting the attackers faster than before, with a drastic improvement in dwell time
  • Containing incidents more rapidly
  • Relying more on in-house detection and remediation mechanisms

To that end, what concepts and methods further enable handlers and investigators as they continue to strive for faster detection and containment? Data science and visualization sure can’t hurt. How can we be more creative to achieve “deeper functionality”? I propose a two-part series on Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R with the following DFIR Redefined scenarios:

  • Have you been pwned?
  • Visualization for malicious Windows Event Id sequences
  • How do your potential attackers feel, or can you identify an attacker via sentiment analysis?
  • Fast Frugal Trees (decision trees) for prioritizing criticality

R is “100% focused and built for statistical data analysis and visualization” and “makes it remarkably simple to run extensive statistical analysis on your data and then generate informative and appealing visualizations with just a few lines of code.”

With R you can interface with data via file ingestion, database connection, APIs and benefit from a wide range of packages and strong community investment.
From the Win-Vector Blog, per John Mount “not all R users consider themselves to be expert programmers (many are happy calling themselves analysts). R is often used in collaborative projects where there are varying levels of programming expertise.”
I propose that this represents the vast majority of us, we’re not expert programmers, data scientists, or statisticians. More likely, we’re security analysts re-using code for our own purposes, be it red team or blue team. With a very few lines of R investigators might be more quickly able to reach conclusions.
All the code described in the post can be found on my GitHub.

Have you been pwned?

This scenario I covered in an earlier post, I’ll refer you to Toolsmith Release Advisory: Steph Locke’s HIBPwned R package.

Visualization for malicious Windows Event Id sequences

Windows Events by Event ID present excellent sequenced visualization opportunities. A hypothetical scenario for this visualization might include multiple failed logon attempts (4625) followed by a successful logon (4624), then various malicious sequences. A fantastic reference paper built on these principle is Intrusion Detection Using Indicators of Compromise Based on Best Practices and Windows Event Logs. An additional opportunity for such sequence visualization includes Windows processes by parent/children. One R library particularly well suited to is TraMineR: Trajectory Miner for R. This package is for mining, describing and visualizing sequences of states or events, and more generally discrete sequence data. It’s primary aim is the analysis of biographical longitudinal data in the social sciences, such as data describing careers or family trajectories, and a BUNCH of other categorical sequence data. Somehow though, the project page somehow fails to mention malicious Windows Event ID sequences. πŸ™‚ Consider Figures 1 and 2 as retrieved from above mentioned paper. Figure 1 are text sequence descriptions, followed by their related Windows Event IDs in Figure 2.
Figure 1
Figure 2

Taking related log data, parsing and counting it for visualization with R would look something like Figure 3.

Figure 3
How much R code does it take to visualize this data with a beautiful, interactive sunburst visualization? Three lines, not counting white space and comments, as seen in the video below.
A screen capture of the resulting sunburst also follows as Figure 4.

Figure 4

How do your potential attackers feel, or can you identify an attacker via sentiment analysis?
Do certain adversaries or adversarial communities use social media? Yes
As such, can social media serve as an early warning system, if not an actual sensor? Yes
Are certain adversaries, at times, so unaware of OpSec on social media that you can actually locate them or correlate against other geo data? Yes
Some excellent R code to assess Twitter data with includes Jeff Gentry’s twitteR and rtweet to interface with the Twitter API.
  • twitteR: provides access to the Twitter API. Most functionality of the API is supported, with a bias towards API calls that are more useful in data analysis as opposed to daily interaction.
  • Rtweet: R client for interacting with Twitter’s REST and stream API’s.
The code and concepts here are drawn directly from Michael Levy, PhD UC Davis: Playing With Twitter.
Here’s the scenario: DDoS attacks from hacktivist or chaos groups.
Attacker groups often use associated hashtags and handles and the minions that want to be “part of” often retweet and use the hashtag(s). Individual attackers either freely give themselves away, or often become easily identifiable or associated, via Twitter. As such, here’s a walk-through of analysis techniques that may help identify or better understand the motives of certain adversaries and adversary groups. I don’t use actual adversary handles here, for obvious reasons. I instead used a DDoS news cycle and journalist/bloggers handles as exemplars. For this example I followed the trail of the WireX botnet, comprised mainly of Android mobile devices utilized to launch a high-impact DDoS extortion campaign against multiple organizations in the travel and hospitality sector in August 2017. I started with three related hashtags: 
  1. #DDOS 
  2. #Android 
  3. #WireX
We start with all related Tweets by day and time of day. The code is succinct and efficient, as noted in Figure 5.

Figure 5

The result is a pair of graphs color coded by tweets and retweets per Figure 6.

Figure 6

This gives you an immediate feels for spikes in interest by day as well as time of day, particularly with attention to retweets.

Want to see what platforms potential adversaries might be tweeting from? No problem, code in Figure 7.

Figure 7

The result in the scenario ironically indicates that the majority of related tweets using our hashtags of interest are coming from Androids per Figure 8. πŸ™‚

Figure 8
Now to the analysis of emotional valence, or the “the intrinsic attractiveness (positive valence) or averseness (negative valence) of an event, object, or situation.”
orig$text[which.max(orig$emotionalValence)] tells us that the most positive tweet is “A bunch of Internet tech companies had to work together to clean up #WireX #Android #DDoS #botnet.”
orig$text[which.min(orig$emotionalValence)] tells us that “Dangerous #WireX #Android #DDoS #Botnet Killed by #SecurityGiants” is the most negative tweet.
Interesting right? Almost exactly the same message, but very different valence.
How do we measure emotional valence changes over the day? Four lines later…
filter(orig, mday(created) == 29) %>%
  ggplot(aes(created, emotionalValence)) +
  geom_point() + 
  geom_smooth(span = .5)
…and we have Figure 9, which tell us that most tweets about WireX were emotionally neutral on 29 AUG 2017, around 0800 we saw one positive tweet, a more negative tweets overall in the morning.

Figure 9

Another line of questioning to consider: which tweets are more often retweeted, positive or negative? As you can imagine with information security focused topics, negativity wins the day.
Three lines of R…
ggplot(orig, aes(x = emotionalValence, y = retweetCount)) +
  geom_point(position = ‘jitter’) +
  geom_smooth()
…and we learn just how popular negative tweets are in Figure 10.

Figure 10

There are cluster of emotionally neutral retweets, two positive retweets, and a load of negative retweets. This type of analysis can quickly lead to a good feel for the overall sentiment of an attacker collective, particularly one with less opsec and more desire for attention via social media.
In Part 2 of DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R we’ll explore this scenario further via sentiment analysis and Twitter data, as well as Fast Frugal Trees (decision trees) for prioritizing criticality.
Let me know if you have any questions on the first part of this series via @holisticinfosec or russ at holisticinfosec dot org.
Cheers…until next time. 

The post toolsmith #128 – DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R – Part 1 appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Continue reading toolsmith #128 – DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R – Part 1

toolsmith #128 – DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R – Part 1

β€œTo competently perform rectifying security service, two critical incident response elements are necessary: information and organization.” ~ Robert E. DavisI’ve been presenting DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R across t… Continue reading toolsmith #128 – DFIR Redefined: Deeper Functionality for Investigators with R – Part 1

Toolsmith #126: Adversary hunting with SOF-ELK

As we celebrate Independence Day, I’m reminded that we honor what was, of course, an armed conflict. Today’s realities, when we think about conflict, are quite different that the days of lining troops up across the field from each other, loading musket… Continue reading Toolsmith #126: Adversary hunting with SOF-ELK

Toolsmith #126: Adversary hunting with SOF-ELK

As we celebrate Independence Day, I’m reminded that we honor what was, of course, an armed conflict. Today’s realities, when we think about conflict, are quite different than the days of lining troops up across the field from each other, loading musket… Continue reading Toolsmith #126: Adversary hunting with SOF-ELK

A Brief Recap of the SANS DFIR Summit

Hello again readers and welcome back!! I had the pleasure of attending (and speaking at, more on that in a bit!) at the 10th SANS DFIR Summit this past week. It is one conference that I always try to attend, as it always has a fantastic lineup of DFIR … Continue reading A Brief Recap of the SANS DFIR Summit

How to load a SQL .bak file for analysis, without SQL Server previously installed

Hello again readers and welcome back! I hope that this new year has been treating you well so far! I recently worked a case with an interesting twist that I never had to deal with before, so I figured I would make a blog post about it and share my expe… Continue reading How to load a SQL .bak file for analysis, without SQL Server previously installed

The DFIR Hierarchy of Needs & Critical Security Controls

As you weigh how best to improve your organization’s digital forensics and incident response (DFIR) capabilities heading into 2017, consider Matt Swann‘s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs. Likely, at some point in your career (or therapy 😉) you’ve heard reference to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. In summary, Maslow’s terms,  physiological, safety, belongingness & love, esteem, self-actualization, and self-transcendence, describe a pattern that human motivations generally move through, a pattern that is well represented in the form of a pyramid.
Matt has made great use of this model to describe an Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs, through which your DFIR methods should move. I argue that his powerful description of capabilities extends to the whole of DFIR rather than response alone. From Matt’s Github, “the Incident Response Hierarchy describes the capabilities that organizations must build to defend their business assets. Bottom capabilities are prerequisites for successful execution of the capabilities above them:”

The Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs

“The capabilities may also be organized into plateaus or phases that organizations may experience as they develop these capabilities:”

Hierarchy plateaus or phases

As visualizations, these representations really do speak for themselves, and I applaud Matt’s fine work. I would like to propose that a body of references and controls may be of use to you in achieving this hierarchy to its utmost. I also welcome your feedback and contributions regarding how to achieve each of these needs and phases. Feel free to submit controls, tools, and tactics you have or would deploy to be successful in these endeavors; I’ll post your submission along with your preferred social media handle.
Aspects of the Center for Internet Security Critical Security Controls Version 6.1 (CIS CSC) can be mapped to each of Matt’s hierarchical entities and phases. Below I offer one control and one tool to support each entry. Note that there is a level of subjectivity to these mappings and tooling, but the intent is to help you adopt this thinking and achieve this agenda. Following is an example for each one, starting from the bottom of the pyramid.

 INVENTORY – Can you name the assets you are defending?  
Critical Security Control #1: Inventory of Authorized and Unauthorized Devices
Family: System
Control: 1.4     
“Maintain an asset inventory of all systems connected to the network and the network devices themselves, recording at least the network addresses, machine name(s), purpose of each system, an asset owner responsible for each device, and the department associated with each device. The inventory should include every system that has an Internet protocol (IP) address on the network, including but not limited to desktops, laptops, servers, network equipment (routers, switches, firewalls, etc.), printers, storage area networks, Voice Over-IP telephones, multi-homed addresses, virtual addresses, etc.  The asset inventory created must also include data on whether the device is a portable and/or personal device. Devices such as mobile phones, tablets, laptops, and other portable electronic devices that store or process data must be identified, regardless of whether they are attached to the organization’s network.” 
Tool option:
Spiceworks Inventory

 TELEMETRY – Do you have visibility across your assets?  
Critical Security Control #6: Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs
Family: System
Control: 6.6      “Deploy a SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) or log analytic tools for log aggregation and consolidation from multiple machines and for log correlation and analysis.  Using the SIEM tool, system administrators and security personnel should devise profiles of common events from given systems so that they can tune detection to focus on unusual activity, avoid false positives, more rapidly identify anomalies, and prevent overwhelming analysts with insignificant alerts.”
Tool option:  
AlienVault OSSIM

 DETECTION – Can you detect unauthorized actvity? 
Critical Security Control #8: Malware Defenses
Family: System
Control: 8.1
“Employ automated tools to continuously monitor workstations, servers, and mobile devices with anti-virus, anti-spyware, personal firewalls, and host-based IPS functionality. All malware detection events should be sent to enterprise anti-malware administration tools and event log servers.”
Tool option:
OSSEC Open Source HIDS SECurity

 TRIAGE – Can you accurately classify detection results? 
Critical Security Control #4: Continuous Vulnerability Assessment and Remediation
Family: System
Control: 4.3
“Correlate event logs with information from vulnerability scans to fulfill two goals. First, personnel should verify that the activity of the regular vulnerability scanning tools is itself logged. Second, personnel should be able to correlate attack detection events with prior vulnerability scanning results to determine whether the given exploit was used against a target known to be vulnerable.”
Tool option:
OpenVAS         

 THREATS – Who are your adversaries? What are their capabilities? 
Critical Security Control #19: Incident Response and Management
Family: Application
Control: 19.7
“Conduct periodic incident scenario sessions for personnel associated with the incident handling team to ensure that they understand current threats and risks, as well as their responsibilities in supporting the incident handling team.”
Tool option:
Security Incident Response Testing To Meet Audit Requirements

 BEHAVIORS – Can you detect adversary activity within your environment? 
Critical Security Control #5: Controlled Use of Administrative Privileges
Family: System
Control: 5.1
“Minimize administrative privileges and only use administrative accounts when they are required.  Implement focused auditing on the use of administrative privileged functions and monitor for anomalous behavior.”
Tool option: 
Local Administrator Password Solution (LAPS)

 HUNT – Can you detect an adversary that is already embedded? 
Critical Security Control #6: Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs       
Family: System
Control: 6.4
“Have security personnel and/or system administrators run biweekly reports that identify anomalies in logs. They should then actively review the anomalies, documenting their findings.”
Tool option:
GRR Rapid Response

 TRACK – During an intrusion, can you observe adversary activity in real time? 
Critical Security Control #12: Boundary Defense
Family: Network
Control: 12.10
“To help identify covert channels exfiltrating data through a firewall, configure the built-in firewall session tracking mechanisms included in many commercial firewalls to identify TCP sessions that last an unusually long time for the given organization and firewall device, alerting personnel about the source and destination addresses associated with these long sessions.”
Tool option:
Bro

 ACT – Can you deploy countermeasures to evict and recover? 
Critical Security Control #20: Penetration Tests and Red Team Exercises       
Family: Application
Control: 20.3
“Perform periodic Red Team exercises to test organizational readiness to identify and stop attacks or to respond quickly and effectively.”
Tool option:
Red vs Blue – PowerSploit vs PowerForensics

 Can you collaborate with trusted parties to disrupt adversary campaigns? 
Critical Security Control #19: Incident Response and Management       
Family: Application
Control: 19.5
“Assemble and maintain information on third-party contact information to be used to report a security incident (e.g., maintain an e-mail address of security@organization.com or have a web page http://organization.com/security).”
Tool option:
MISP

I’ve also started to map the hierarchy to the controls in CIS CSC 6.1 spreadsheet, again based on my experience and perspective, your may differ, but consider similar activity.

I’ll make my first pass at the spreadsheet mapping effort available here shortly.

I truly hope you familiarize yourself with Matt‘s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs and find ways to implement, validate, and improve your capabilities accordingly. Consider that the controls and tools mentioned here are but a starting point and that you have many other options available to you. I look forward to hearing from you regarding your preferred tactics and tools as well. Kudos to Matt for framing this essential discussion so distinctly.

Continue reading The DFIR Hierarchy of Needs & Critical Security Controls

The DFIR Hierarchy of Needs & Critical Security Controls

As you weigh how best to improve your organization’s digital forensics and incident response (DFIR) capabilities heading into 2017, consider Matt Swann‘s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs. Likely, at some point in your career (or therapy 😉) you’ve heard reference to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. In summary, Maslow’s terms,  physiological, safety, belongingness & love, esteem, self-actualization, and self-transcendence, describe a pattern that human motivations generally move through, a pattern that is well represented in the form of a pyramid.
Matt has made great use of this model to describe an Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs, through which your DFIR methods should move. I argue that his powerful description of capabilities extends to the whole of DFIR rather than response alone. From Matt’s Github, “the Incident Response Hierarchy describes the capabilities that organizations must build to defend their business assets. Bottom capabilities are prerequisites for successful execution of the capabilities above them:”

The Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs

“The capabilities may also be organized into plateaus or phases that organizations may experience as they develop these capabilities:”

Hierarchy plateaus or phases

As visualizations, these representations really do speak for themselves, and I applaud Matt’s fine work. I would like to propose that a body of references and controls may be of use to you in achieving this hierarchy to its utmost. I also welcome your feedback and contributions regarding how to achieve each of these needs and phases. Feel free to submit controls, tools, and tactics you have or would deploy to be successful in these endeavors; I’ll post your submission along with your preferred social media handle.
Aspects of the Center for Internet Security Critical Security Controls Version 6.1 (CIS CSC) can be mapped to each of Matt’s hierarchical entities and phases. Below I offer one control and one tool to support each entry. Note that there is a level of subjectivity to these mappings and tooling, but the intent is to help you adopt this thinking and achieve this agenda. Following is an example for each one, starting from the bottom of the pyramid.

 INVENTORY – Can you name the assets you are defending?  
Critical Security Control #1: Inventory of Authorized and Unauthorized Devices
Family: System
Control: 1.4     
“Maintain an asset inventory of all systems connected to the network and the network devices themselves, recording at least the network addresses, machine name(s), purpose of each system, an asset owner responsible for each device, and the department associated with each device. The inventory should include every system that has an Internet protocol (IP) address on the network, including but not limited to desktops, laptops, servers, network equipment (routers, switches, firewalls, etc.), printers, storage area networks, Voice Over-IP telephones, multi-homed addresses, virtual addresses, etc.  The asset inventory created must also include data on whether the device is a portable and/or personal device. Devices such as mobile phones, tablets, laptops, and other portable electronic devices that store or process data must be identified, regardless of whether they are attached to the organization’s network.” 
Tool option:
Spiceworks Inventory

 TELEMETRY – Do you have visibility across your assets?  
Critical Security Control #6: Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs
Family: System
Control: 6.6      “Deploy a SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) or log analytic tools for log aggregation and consolidation from multiple machines and for log correlation and analysis.  Using the SIEM tool, system administrators and security personnel should devise profiles of common events from given systems so that they can tune detection to focus on unusual activity, avoid false positives, more rapidly identify anomalies, and prevent overwhelming analysts with insignificant alerts.”
Tool option:  
AlienVault OSSIM

 DETECTION – Can you detect unauthorized actvity? 
Critical Security Control #8: Malware Defenses
Family: System
Control: 8.1
“Employ automated tools to continuously monitor workstations, servers, and mobile devices with anti-virus, anti-spyware, personal firewalls, and host-based IPS functionality. All malware detection events should be sent to enterprise anti-malware administration tools and event log servers.”
Tool option:
OSSEC Open Source HIDS SECurity

 TRIAGE – Can you accurately classify detection results? 
Critical Security Control #4: Continuous Vulnerability Assessment and Remediation
Family: System
Control: 4.3
“Correlate event logs with information from vulnerability scans to fulfill two goals. First, personnel should verify that the activity of the regular vulnerability scanning tools is itself logged. Second, personnel should be able to correlate attack detection events with prior vulnerability scanning results to determine whether the given exploit was used against a target known to be vulnerable.”
Tool option:
OpenVAS         

 THREATS – Who are your adversaries? What are their capabilities? 
Critical Security Control #19: Incident Response and Management
Family: Application
Control: 19.7
“Conduct periodic incident scenario sessions for personnel associated with the incident handling team to ensure that they understand current threats and risks, as well as their responsibilities in supporting the incident handling team.”
Tool option:
Security Incident Response Testing To Meet Audit Requirements

 BEHAVIORS – Can you detect adversary activity within your environment? 
Critical Security Control #5: Controlled Use of Administrative Privileges
Family: System
Control: 5.1
“Minimize administrative privileges and only use administrative accounts when they are required.  Implement focused auditing on the use of administrative privileged functions and monitor for anomalous behavior.”
Tool option: 
Local Administrator Password Solution (LAPS)

 HUNT – Can you detect an adversary that is already embedded? 
Critical Security Control #6: Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs       
Family: System
Control: 6.4
“Have security personnel and/or system administrators run biweekly reports that identify anomalies in logs. They should then actively review the anomalies, documenting their findings.”
Tool option:
GRR Rapid Response

 TRACK – During an intrusion, can you observe adversary activity in real time? 
Critical Security Control #12: Boundary Defense
Family: Network
Control: 12.10
“To help identify covert channels exfiltrating data through a firewall, configure the built-in firewall session tracking mechanisms included in many commercial firewalls to identify TCP sessions that last an unusually long time for the given organization and firewall device, alerting personnel about the source and destination addresses associated with these long sessions.”
Tool option:
Bro

 ACT – Can you deploy countermeasures to evict and recover? 
Critical Security Control #20: Penetration Tests and Red Team Exercises       
Family: Application
Control: 20.3
“Perform periodic Red Team exercises to test organizational readiness to identify and stop attacks or to respond quickly and effectively.”
Tool option:
Red vs Blue – PowerSploit vs PowerForensics

 Can you collaborate with trusted parties to disrupt adversary campaigns? 
Critical Security Control #19: Incident Response and Management       
Family: Application
Control: 19.5
“Assemble and maintain information on third-party contact information to be used to report a security incident (e.g., maintain an e-mail address of security@organization.com or have a web page http://organization.com/security).”
Tool option:
MISP

I’ve mapped the hierarchy to the controls in CIS CSC 6.1 spreadsheet, again based on my experience and perspective, yours may differ, but consider similar activity.

CIS CSC with IR Hierarchy mappings

My full mapping of Matt’s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs in the
CIS CSC 6.1 spreadsheet is available here: http://bit.ly/CSC-IRH

I truly hope you familiarize yourself with Matt‘s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs and find ways to implement, validate, and improve your capabilities accordingly. Consider that the controls and tools mentioned here are but a starting point and that you have many other options available to you. I look forward to hearing from you regarding your preferred tactics and tools as well. Kudos to Matt for framing this essential discussion so distinctly.

Continue reading The DFIR Hierarchy of Needs & Critical Security Controls

The DFIR Hierarchy of Needs & Critical Security Controls

As you weigh how best to improve your organization’s digital forensics and incident response (DFIR) capabilities heading into 2017, consider Matt Swann‘s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs. Likely, at some point in your career (or therapy 😉) you’ve heard reference to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. In summary, Maslow’s terms,  physiological, safety, belongingness & love, esteem, self-actualization, and self-transcendence, describe a pattern that human motivations generally move through, a pattern that is well represented in the form of a pyramid.
Matt has made great use of this model to describe an Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs, through which your DFIR methods should move. I argue that his powerful description of capabilities extends to the whole of DFIR rather than response alone. From Matt’s Github, “the Incident Response Hierarchy describes the capabilities that organizations must build to defend their business assets. Bottom capabilities are prerequisites for successful execution of the capabilities above them:”

The Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs

“The capabilities may also be organized into plateaus or phases that organizations may experience as they develop these capabilities:”

Hierarchy plateaus or phases

As visualizations, these representations really do speak for themselves, and I applaud Matt’s fine work. I would like to propose that a body of references and controls may be of use to you in achieving this hierarchy to its utmost. I also welcome your feedback and contributions regarding how to achieve each of these needs and phases. Feel free to submit controls, tools, and tactics you have or would deploy to be successful in these endeavors; I’ll post your submission along with your preferred social media handle.
Aspects of the Center for Internet Security Critical Security Controls Version 6.1 (CIS CSC) can be mapped to each of Matt’s hierarchical entities and phases. Below I offer one control and one tool to support each entry. Note that there is a level of subjectivity to these mappings and tooling, but the intent is to help you adopt this thinking and achieve this agenda. Following is an example for each one, starting from the bottom of the pyramid.

 INVENTORY – Can you name the assets you are defending?  
Critical Security Control #1: Inventory of Authorized and Unauthorized Devices
Family: System
Control: 1.4     
“Maintain an asset inventory of all systems connected to the network and the network devices themselves, recording at least the network addresses, machine name(s), purpose of each system, an asset owner responsible for each device, and the department associated with each device. The inventory should include every system that has an Internet protocol (IP) address on the network, including but not limited to desktops, laptops, servers, network equipment (routers, switches, firewalls, etc.), printers, storage area networks, Voice Over-IP telephones, multi-homed addresses, virtual addresses, etc.  The asset inventory created must also include data on whether the device is a portable and/or personal device. Devices such as mobile phones, tablets, laptops, and other portable electronic devices that store or process data must be identified, regardless of whether they are attached to the organization’s network.” 
Tool option:
Spiceworks Inventory

 TELEMETRY – Do you have visibility across your assets?  
Critical Security Control #6: Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs
Family: System
Control: 6.6      “Deploy a SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) or log analytic tools for log aggregation and consolidation from multiple machines and for log correlation and analysis.  Using the SIEM tool, system administrators and security personnel should devise profiles of common events from given systems so that they can tune detection to focus on unusual activity, avoid false positives, more rapidly identify anomalies, and prevent overwhelming analysts with insignificant alerts.”
Tool option:  
AlienVault OSSIM

 DETECTION – Can you detect unauthorized actvity? 
Critical Security Control #8: Malware Defenses
Family: System
Control: 8.1
“Employ automated tools to continuously monitor workstations, servers, and mobile devices with anti-virus, anti-spyware, personal firewalls, and host-based IPS functionality. All malware detection events should be sent to enterprise anti-malware administration tools and event log servers.”
Tool option:
OSSEC Open Source HIDS SECurity

 TRIAGE – Can you accurately classify detection results? 
Critical Security Control #4: Continuous Vulnerability Assessment and Remediation
Family: System
Control: 4.3
“Correlate event logs with information from vulnerability scans to fulfill two goals. First, personnel should verify that the activity of the regular vulnerability scanning tools is itself logged. Second, personnel should be able to correlate attack detection events with prior vulnerability scanning results to determine whether the given exploit was used against a target known to be vulnerable.”
Tool option:
OpenVAS         

 THREATS – Who are your adversaries? What are their capabilities? 
Critical Security Control #19: Incident Response and Management
Family: Application
Control: 19.7
“Conduct periodic incident scenario sessions for personnel associated with the incident handling team to ensure that they understand current threats and risks, as well as their responsibilities in supporting the incident handling team.”
Tool option:
Security Incident Response Testing To Meet Audit Requirements

 BEHAVIORS – Can you detect adversary activity within your environment? 
Critical Security Control #5: Controlled Use of Administrative Privileges
Family: System
Control: 5.1
“Minimize administrative privileges and only use administrative accounts when they are required.  Implement focused auditing on the use of administrative privileged functions and monitor for anomalous behavior.”
Tool option: 
Local Administrator Password Solution (LAPS)

 HUNT – Can you detect an adversary that is already embedded? 
Critical Security Control #6: Maintenance, Monitoring, and Analysis of Audit Logs       
Family: System
Control: 6.4
“Have security personnel and/or system administrators run biweekly reports that identify anomalies in logs. They should then actively review the anomalies, documenting their findings.”
Tool option:
GRR Rapid Response

 TRACK – During an intrusion, can you observe adversary activity in real time? 
Critical Security Control #12: Boundary Defense
Family: Network
Control: 12.10
“To help identify covert channels exfiltrating data through a firewall, configure the built-in firewall session tracking mechanisms included in many commercial firewalls to identify TCP sessions that last an unusually long time for the given organization and firewall device, alerting personnel about the source and destination addresses associated with these long sessions.”
Tool option:
Bro

 ACT – Can you deploy countermeasures to evict and recover? 
Critical Security Control #20: Penetration Tests and Red Team Exercises       
Family: Application
Control: 20.3
“Perform periodic Red Team exercises to test organizational readiness to identify and stop attacks or to respond quickly and effectively.”
Tool option:
Red vs Blue – PowerSploit vs PowerForensics

 Can you collaborate with trusted parties to disrupt adversary campaigns? 
Critical Security Control #19: Incident Response and Management       
Family: Application
Control: 19.5
“Assemble and maintain information on third-party contact information to be used to report a security incident (e.g., maintain an e-mail address of security@organization.com or have a web page http://organization.com/security).”
Tool option:
MISP

I’ve mapped the hierarchy to the controls in CIS CSC 6.1 spreadsheet, again based on my experience and perspective, yours may differ, but consider similar activity.

CIS CSC with IR Hierarchy mappings

My full mapping of Matt’s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs in the
CIS CSC 6.1 spreadsheet is available here: http://bit.ly/CSC-IRH

I truly hope you familiarize yourself with Matt‘s Incident Response Hierarchy of Needs and find ways to implement, validate, and improve your capabilities accordingly. Consider that the controls and tools mentioned here are but a starting point and that you have many other options available to you. I look forward to hearing from you regarding your preferred tactics and tools as well. Kudos to Matt for framing this essential discussion so distinctly.

Continue reading The DFIR Hierarchy of Needs & Critical Security Controls

Live Response Collection – Bambiraptor

Good news everyone!! After a fairly busy year, the past few weeks I have finally had enough down time to work on adding some long overdue, and hopefully highly anticipated, features to the Live Response Collection. This version, named Bambiraptor, will… Continue reading Live Response Collection – Bambiraptor