mirror of
https://github.com/SHOGGOTH-SECTOR/sica-fondt.git
synced 2026-08-01 16:40:24 +00:00
24f816b6a3
Place useful parts of the surrounding repos into sica-fondt by layer, per the
body model (Ada = membrane; brain/endocrine/capabilities/knowledge non-Ada):
- brain/ LLM reasoning + providers (dapr, hermes, MoMoA)
- capabilities/ REPRAG sidecars: hermes tools/skills, dapr tools, parallel
dispatch, A51 channels, and the OSINT cluster
- knowledge/ LORAG corpus: 754 cyber-skills, agency personas, secure-coding,
MITRE ATT&CK data
- reference/ defensive threat-reference (C3, shhbruh doc) + AdaYaml parser
License handling: AGPL sources (worldosint, advanced_evolution, mercury,
Reticulum) and GPL DeTTECT are SPEC-only clean-room/port descriptions — no
copyleft code copied. MIT/Apache/data parts copied as working trees.
Safety: shhbruh escape/persistence material and C3 covert-C2 kept as reference
only, not wired into the running organism. See CONSOLIDATION.md.
https://claude.ai/code/session_01UehUqEXXJJCsHoA4voCU5c
97 lines
3.3 KiB
Markdown
97 lines
3.3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: hunting-for-supply-chain-compromise
|
|
description: Hunt for supply chain compromise indicators including trojanized software updates, compromised dependencies,
|
|
unauthorized code modifications, and tampered build artifacts.
|
|
domain: cybersecurity
|
|
subdomain: threat-hunting
|
|
tags:
|
|
- threat-hunting
|
|
- mitre-attack
|
|
- supply-chain
|
|
- initial-access
|
|
- t1195
|
|
- proactive-detection
|
|
version: '1.0'
|
|
author: mahipal
|
|
license: Apache-2.0
|
|
d3fend_techniques:
|
|
- Platform Hardening
|
|
- Restore Object
|
|
- Restore Software
|
|
- Software Update
|
|
- Asset Inventory
|
|
nist_csf:
|
|
- DE.CM-01
|
|
- DE.AE-02
|
|
- DE.AE-07
|
|
- ID.RA-05
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Hunting For Supply Chain Compromise
|
|
|
|
## When to Use
|
|
|
|
- When proactively hunting for indicators of hunting for supply chain compromise in the environment
|
|
- After threat intelligence indicates active campaigns using these techniques
|
|
- During incident response to scope compromise related to these techniques
|
|
- When EDR or SIEM alerts trigger on related indicators
|
|
- During periodic security assessments and purple team exercises
|
|
|
|
## Prerequisites
|
|
|
|
- EDR platform with process and network telemetry (CrowdStrike, MDE, SentinelOne)
|
|
- SIEM with relevant log data ingested (Splunk, Elastic, Sentinel)
|
|
- Sysmon deployed with comprehensive configuration
|
|
- Windows Security Event Log forwarding enabled
|
|
- Threat intelligence feeds for IOC correlation
|
|
|
|
## Workflow
|
|
|
|
1. **Formulate Hypothesis**: Define a testable hypothesis based on threat intelligence or ATT&CK gap analysis.
|
|
2. **Identify Data Sources**: Determine which logs and telemetry are needed to validate or refute the hypothesis.
|
|
3. **Execute Queries**: Run detection queries against SIEM and EDR platforms to collect relevant events.
|
|
4. **Analyze Results**: Examine query results for anomalies, correlating across multiple data sources.
|
|
5. **Validate Findings**: Distinguish true positives from false positives through contextual analysis.
|
|
6. **Correlate Activity**: Link findings to broader attack chains and threat actor TTPs.
|
|
7. **Document and Report**: Record findings, update detection rules, and recommend response actions.
|
|
|
|
## Key Concepts
|
|
|
|
| Concept | Description |
|
|
|---------|-------------|
|
|
| T1195.001 | Compromise Software Dependencies |
|
|
| T1195.002 | Compromise Software Supply Chain |
|
|
| T1199 | Trusted Relationship |
|
|
|
|
## Tools & Systems
|
|
|
|
| Tool | Purpose |
|
|
|------|---------|
|
|
| CrowdStrike Falcon | EDR telemetry and threat detection |
|
|
| Microsoft Defender for Endpoint | Advanced hunting with KQL |
|
|
| Splunk Enterprise | SIEM log analysis with SPL queries |
|
|
| Elastic Security | Detection rules and investigation timeline |
|
|
| Sysmon | Detailed Windows event monitoring |
|
|
| Velociraptor | Endpoint artifact collection and hunting |
|
|
| Sigma Rules | Cross-platform detection rule format |
|
|
|
|
## Common Scenarios
|
|
|
|
1. **Scenario 1**: SolarWinds-style update mechanism compromise
|
|
2. **Scenario 2**: Compromised npm/PyPI package with backdoor
|
|
3. **Scenario 3**: Tampered build server deploying malicious artifacts
|
|
4. **Scenario 4**: Vendor VPN software update delivering malware
|
|
|
|
## Output Format
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Hunt ID: TH-HUNTIN-[DATE]-[SEQ]
|
|
Technique: T1195.001
|
|
Host: [Hostname]
|
|
User: [Account context]
|
|
Evidence: [Log entries, process trees, network data]
|
|
Risk Level: [Critical/High/Medium/Low]
|
|
Confidence: [High/Medium/Low]
|
|
Recommended Action: [Containment, investigation, monitoring]
|
|
```
|