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
- Formulate Hypothesis: Define a testable hypothesis based on threat intelligence or ATT&CK gap analysis.
- Identify Data Sources: Determine which logs and telemetry are needed to validate or refute the hypothesis.
- Execute Queries: Run detection queries against SIEM and EDR platforms to collect relevant events.
- Analyze Results: Examine query results for anomalies, correlating across multiple data sources.
- Validate Findings: Distinguish true positives from false positives through contextual analysis.
- Correlate Activity: Link findings to broader attack chains and threat actor TTPs.
- 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
- Scenario 1: SolarWinds-style update mechanism compromise
- Scenario 2: Compromised npm/PyPI package with backdoor
- Scenario 3: Tampered build server deploying malicious artifacts
- 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]
---
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.
license: Apache-2.0
---
# 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]
```
