alirezaaminzadeh/secembed-pairs huggingface dataset:
Query: what is T1204.003
Matching passage: T1204.003 Malicious Image. Tactics: execution. Description: Adversaries may rely on a user running a malicious image to facilitate execution. Amazon Web Services (AWS) Amazon Machine Images (AMIs), Google Cloud Platform (GCP) Images, and Azure Images as well as popular container runtimes such as Docker can be backdoored. Backdoored images may be uploaded to a public repository via [Upload Malware](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1608/001), and users may then download and deploy an instance or container from the image without realizing the image is malicious, thus bypassing techniques that specifically achieve Initial Access. This can lead to the execution of malicious code, such as code that executes cryptocurrency mining, in the instance or container.(Citation: Summit Route Malicious AMIs) Adversaries may also name images a certain way to increase the chance of users mistakenly deploying an instance or container from the image (ex: [Match Legitimate Resource Name or Location](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1036/005)).(Citation: Aqua Security Cloud Native Threat Report June 2021)
Near-miss passage: T1204 User Execution. Tactics: execution. Description: An adversary may rely upon specific actions by a user in order to gain execution. Users may be subjected to social engineering to get them to execute malicious code by, for example, opening a malicious document file or link. These user actions will typically be observed as follow-on behavior from forms of [Phishing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1566). While [User Execution](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1204) frequently occurs shortly after Initial Access it may occur at other phases of an intrusion, such as when an adversary places a file in a shared directory or on a user's desktop hoping that a user will click on it. This activity may also be seen shortly after [Internal Spearphishing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1534). Adversaries may also deceive users into performing actions such as: * Enabling [Remote Access Tools](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1219), allowing direct control of the system to the adversary * Running malicious JavaScript in their browser, allowing adversaries to [Steal Web Session Cookie](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1539)s(Citation: Talos Roblox Scam 2023)(Citation: Krebs Discord Bookmarks 2023) * Downloading and executing malware for [User Execution](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1204) * Coerceing users to copy, paste, and execute malicious code manually(Citation: Reliaquest-execution)(Citation: proofpoint-selfpwn) For example, tech support scams can be facilitated through [Phishing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1566), vishing, or various forms of user interaction. Adversaries can use a combination of these methods, such as spoofing and promoting toll-free numbers or call centers that are used to direct victims to malicious websites, to deliver and execute payloads containing malware or [Remote Access Tools](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1219).(Citation: Telephone Attack Delivery)
Query: describe CVE-2015-0598
Matching passage: CVE-2015-0598. CWE: CWE-19. CVSS: 6.800000190734863. The RADIUS implementation in Cisco IOS and IOS XE allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) via crafted IPv6 Attributes in Access-Accept packets, aka Bug IDs CSCur84322 and CSCur27693.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-8985. CWE: CWE-19. CVSS: 5.900000095367432. The pop_fail_stack function in the GNU C Library (aka glibc or libc6) allows context-dependent attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and application crash) via vectors related to extended regular expression processing.
Query: patch priority for CVE-2015-1948
Matching passage: CVE-2015-1948. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 7.800000190734863. Stack-based buffer overflow in the server in IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack 6.1 before 6.1.12 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-1924, CVE-2015-1925, CVE-2015-1929, CVE-2015-1930, CVE-2015-1953, CVE-2015-1954, CVE-2015-1962, CVE-2015-1963, CVE-2015-1964, and CVE-2015-1965.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-5871. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 7.199999809265137. IOGraphics in Apple OS X before 10.11 allows local users to gain privileges or cause a denial of service (memory corruption) via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-5872, CVE-2015-5873, and CVE-2015-5890.
Query: CVE similar to CVE-2015-8380
Matching passage: CVE-2015-8380. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 7.5. The pcre_exec function in pcre_exec.c in PCRE before 8.38 mishandles a // pattern with a \01 string, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap-based buffer overflow) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted regular expression, as demonstrated by a JavaScript RegExp object encountered by Konqueror.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-7180. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 7.5. The ReadbackResultWriterD3D11::Run function in Mozilla Firefox before 41.0 and Firefox ESR 38.x before 38.3 misinterprets the return value of a function call, which might allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory corruption and application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact via unknown vectors.
Query: mitigate Email Forwarding Rule
Matching passage: T1114.003 Email Forwarding Rule. Tactics: collection. Description: Adversaries may setup email forwarding rules to collect sensitive information. Adversaries may abuse email forwarding rules to monitor the activities of a victim, steal information, and further gain intelligence on the victim or the victim’s organization to use as part of further exploits or operations.(Citation: US-CERT TA18-068A 2018) Furthermore, email forwarding rules can allow adversaries to maintain persistent access to victim's emails even after compromised credentials are reset by administrators.(Citation: Pfammatter - Hidden Inbox Rules) Most email clients allow users to create inbox rules for various email functions, including forwarding to a different recipient. These rules may be created through a local email application, a web interface, or by command-line interface. Messages can be forwarded to internal or external recipients, and there are no restrictions limiting the extent of this rule. Administrators may also create forwarding rules for user accounts with the same considerations and outcomes.(Citation: Microsoft Tim McMichael Exchange Mail Forwarding 2)(Citation: Mac Forwarding Rules) Any user or administrator within the organization (or adversary with valid credentials) can create rules to automatically forward all received messages to another recipient, forward emails to different locations based on the sender, and more. Adversaries may also hide the rule by making use of the Microsoft Messaging API (MAPI) to modify the rule properties, making it hidden and not visible from Outlook, OWA or most Exchange Administration tools.(Citation: Pfammatter - Hidden Inbox Rules) In some environments, administrators may be able to enable email forwarding rules that operate organization-wide rather than on individual inboxes. For example, Microsoft Exchange supports transport rules that evaluate all mail an organization receives against user-specified conditions, then performs a user-specified action on mail that adheres to those conditions.(Citation: Microsof
Near-miss passage: T1114.001 Local Email Collection. Tactics: collection. Description: Adversaries may target user email on local systems to collect sensitive information. Files containing email data can be acquired from a user’s local system, such as Outlook storage or cache files. Outlook stores data locally in offline data files with an extension of .ost. Outlook 2010 and later supports .ost file sizes up to 50GB, while earlier versions of Outlook support up to 20GB.(Citation: Outlook File Sizes) IMAP accounts in Outlook 2013 (and earlier) and POP accounts use Outlook Data Files (.pst) as opposed to .ost, whereas IMAP accounts in Outlook 2016 (and later) use .ost files. Both types of Outlook data files are typically stored in `C:\Users\<username>\Documents\Outlook Files` or `C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Outlook`.(Citation: Microsoft Outlook Files)
Query: CVE similar to CVE-2015-7672
Matching passage: CVE-2015-7672. CWE: CWE-79. CVSS: 5.400000095367432. Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Centreon 2.6.1 (fixed in Centreon 18.10.0 and Centreon web 2.8.27).
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-5630. CWE: CWE-79. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the NTT Broadband Platform Japan Connected-free Wi-Fi application 1.6.0 and earlier for Android and 1.0.2 and earlier for iOS allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted SSID.
Query: explain T1518.002 Backup Software Discovery
Matching passage: T1518.002 Backup Software Discovery. Tactics: discovery. Description: Adversaries may attempt to get a listing of backup software or configurations that are installed on a system. Adversaries may use this information to shape follow-on behaviors, such as [Data Destruction](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1485), [Inhibit System Recovery](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1490), or [Data Encrypted for Impact](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1486). Commands that can be used to obtain security software information are [netsh](https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0108), `reg query` with [Reg](https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0075), `dir` with [cmd](https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0106), and [Tasklist](https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0057), but other indicators of discovery behavior may be more specific to the type of software or security system the adversary is looking for, such as Veeam, Acronis, Dropbox, or Paragon.(Citation: Symantec Play Ransomware 2023)
Near-miss passage: T1518 Software Discovery. Tactics: discovery. Description: Adversaries may attempt to get a listing of software and software versions that are installed on a system or in a cloud environment. Adversaries may use the information from [Software Discovery](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1518) during automated discovery to shape follow-on behaviors, including whether or not the adversary fully infects the target and/or attempts specific actions. Such software may be deployed widely across the environment for configuration management or security reasons, such as [Software Deployment Tools](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1072), and may allow adversaries broad access to infect devices or move laterally. Adversaries may attempt to enumerate software for a variety of reasons, such as figuring out what security measures are present or if the compromised system has a version of software that is vulnerable to [Exploitation for Privilege Escalation](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1068).
Query: indicators of Group Policy Preferences
Matching passage: T1552.006 Group Policy Preferences. Tactics: credential access. Description: Adversaries may attempt to find unsecured credentials in Group Policy Preferences (GPP). GPP are tools that allow administrators to create domain policies with embedded credentials. These policies allow administrators to set local accounts.(Citation: Microsoft GPP 2016) These group policies are stored in SYSVOL on a domain controller. This means that any domain user can view the SYSVOL share and decrypt the password (using the AES key that has been made public).(Citation: Microsoft GPP Key) The following tools and scripts can be used to gather and decrypt the password file from Group Policy Preference XML files: * Metasploit’s post exploitation module: <code>post/windows/gather/credentials/gpp</code> * Get-GPPPassword(Citation: Obscuresecurity Get-GPPPassword) * gpprefdecrypt.py On the SYSVOL share, adversaries may use the following command to enumerate potential GPP XML files: <code>dir /s * .xml</code>
Near-miss passage: T1552.005 Cloud Instance Metadata API. Tactics: credential access. Description: Adversaries may attempt to access the Cloud Instance Metadata API to collect credentials and other sensitive data. Most cloud service providers support a Cloud Instance Metadata API which is a service provided to running virtual instances that allows applications to access information about the running virtual instance. Available information generally includes name, security group, and additional metadata including sensitive data such as credentials and UserData scripts that may contain additional secrets. The Instance Metadata API is provided as a convenience to assist in managing applications and is accessible by anyone who can access the instance.(Citation: AWS Instance Metadata API) A cloud metadata API has been used in at least one high profile compromise.(Citation: Krebs Capital One August 2019) If adversaries have a presence on the running virtual instance, they may query the Instance Metadata API directly to identify credentials that grant access to additional resources. Additionally, adversaries may exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in a public facing web proxy that allows them to gain access to the sensitive information via a request to the Instance Metadata API.(Citation: RedLock Instance Metadata API 2018) The de facto standard across cloud service providers is to host the Instance Metadata API at <code>http[:]//169.254.169.254</code>.
Query: risk of Cisco Unified Web and E-Mail Interaction Manager 9.0(2) and 11.0(1) improperly performs authorization, which allows remote authenticated users to read or write to stored data via u
Matching passage: CVE-2015-4298. CWE: CWE-284. CVSS: 6.5. Cisco Unified Web and E-Mail Interaction Manager 9.0(2) and 11.0(1) improperly performs authorization, which allows remote authenticated users to read or write to stored data via unspecified vectors, aka Bug ID CSCuo89056.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-6984. CWE: CWE-284. CVSS: 8.800000190734863. libarchive in Apple OS X before 10.11.1 allows attackers to write to arbitrary files via a crafted app that conducts an unspecified symlink attack.
Query: Persistence mechanism resembling Malicious Copy and Paste
Matching passage: T1204.004 Malicious Copy and Paste. Tactics: execution. Description: An adversary may rely upon a user copying and pasting code in order to gain execution. Users may be subjected to social engineering to get them to copy and paste code directly into a [Command and Scripting Interpreter](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1059). One such strategy is "ClickFix," in which adversaries present users with seemingly helpful solutions—such as prompts to fix errors or complete CAPTCHAs—that instead instruct the user to copy and paste malicious code. Malicious websites, such as those used in [Drive-by Compromise](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1189), may present fake error messages or CAPTCHA prompts that instruct users to open a terminal or the Windows Run Dialog box and execute an arbitrary command. These commands may be obfuscated using encoding or other techniques to conceal malicious intent. Once executed, the adversary will typically be able to establish a foothold on the victim's machine.(Citation: CloudSEK Lumma Stealer 2024)(Citation: Sekoia ClickFake 2025)(Citation: Reliaquest CAPTCHA 2024)(Citation: AhnLab LummaC2 2025) Adversaries may also leverage phishing emails for this purpose. When a user attempts to open an attachment, they may be presented with a fake error and offered a malicious command to paste as a solution, consistent with the "ClickFix" strategy.(Citation: Proofpoint ClickFix 2024)(Citation: AhnLab Malicioys Copy Paste 2024) Tricking a user into executing a command themselves may help to bypass email filtering, browser sandboxing, or other mitigations designed to protect users against malicious downloaded files.
Near-miss passage: T1204.005 Malicious Library. Tactics: execution. Description: Adversaries may rely on a user installing a malicious library to facilitate execution. Threat actors may [Upload Malware](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1608/001) to package managers such as NPM and PyPi, as well as to public code repositories such as GitHub. User may install libraries without realizing they are malicious, thus bypassing techniques that specifically achieve Initial Access. This can lead to the execution of malicious code, such as code that establishes persistence, steals data, or mines cryptocurrency.(Citation: Datadog Security Labs Malicious PyPi Packages 2024)(Citation: Fortinet Malicious NPM Packages 2023) In some cases, threat actors may compromise and backdoor existing popular libraries (i.e., [Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1195/001)). Alternatively, they may create entirely new packages and leverage behaviors such as typosquatting to encourage users to install them.
Query: risk of The "RAP console" feature in ArubaOS 5.x through 6.2.x, 6.3.x before 6.3.1.15, and 6.4.x before 6.4.2.4 on Aruba access points in Remote Access Point (AP) mode allows remote attack
Matching passage: CVE-2015-1388. CWE: CWE-78. CVSS: 7.199999809265137. The "RAP console" feature in ArubaOS 5.x through 6.2.x, 6.3.x before 6.3.1.15, and 6.4.x before 6.4.2.4 on Aruba access points in Remote Access Point (AP) mode allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via unspecified vectors.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-7774. CWE: CWE-78. CVSS: 6.5. PC-EGG pWebManager before 3.3.10, and before 2.2.2 for PHP 4.x, allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary OS commands by leveraging the editor role.
Query: explain CWE-1312
Matching passage: CWE-1312 Missing Protection for Mirrored Regions in On-Chip Fabric Firewall. The firewall in an on-chip fabric protects the main addressed region, but it does not protect any mirrored memory or memory-mapped-IO (MMIO) regions.
Near-miss passage: CWE-1258 Exposure of Sensitive System Information Due to Uncleared Debug Information. The hardware does not fully clear security-sensitive values, such as keys and intermediate values in cryptographic operations, when debug mode is entered.
Query: vulnerability: The filtering implementation in AppleEvents in Apple OS X before 10.11 mishandles attempts to send events to a different user, which allows attackers to bypass intended access rest
Matching passage: CVE-2015-5849. CWE: CWE-264. CVSS: 6.800000190734863. The filtering implementation in AppleEvents in Apple OS X before 10.11 mishandles attempts to send events to a different user, which allows attackers to bypass intended access restrictions by leveraging a screen-sharing connection.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-5043. CWE: CWE-264. CVSS: 7.199999809265137. diag in IBM Security Guardium 8.2 before p6015, 9.0 before p6015, 9.1, 9.5, and 10.0 before p6015 allows local users to obtain root access via unspecified key sequences.
Query: risk of Microsoft Windows Vista SP2, Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, and Windows RT Gold and 8.1 allow attackers
Matching passage: CVE-2015-2429. CWE: CWE-264. CVSS: 9.300000190734863. Microsoft Windows Vista SP2, Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, and Windows RT Gold and 8.1 allow attackers to bypass an application sandbox protection mechanism and perform unspecified registry actions via a crafted application, aka "Windows Registry Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability."
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-5784. CWE: CWE-264. CVSS: 9.300000190734863. runner in Install.framework in the Install Framework Legacy component in Apple OS X before 10.10.5 does not properly drop privileges, which allows attackers to execute arbitrary code in a privileged context via a crafted app.
Query: risk of The HTML form implementation in WebKit in Apple iOS before 9 does not prevent QuickType access to the final character of a password, which might make it easier for remote attackers
Matching passage: CVE-2015-5906. CWE: CWE-200. CVSS: 5.0. The HTML form implementation in WebKit in Apple iOS before 9 does not prevent QuickType access to the final character of a password, which might make it easier for remote attackers to discover a password by leveraging a later prediction containing that character.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-0076. CWE: CWE-200. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. The photo-decoder implementation in Microsoft Windows Vista SP2, Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, and Windows RT Gold and 8.1 does not properly initialize memory for rendering of JXR images, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information from process memory via a crafted web site, aka "JPEG XR Parser Information Disclosure Vulnerability."
Query: exploit BIG-IP LTM, AAM, AFM, Analytics, APM, ASM, Link Controller, and PEM 12.0.0 before HF1, when the TCP profile for a virtual server is configured with Congestion Metrics Cache enabled
Matching passage: CVE-2015-7759. CWE: CWE-20. CVSS: 3.700000047683716. BIG-IP LTM, AAM, AFM, Analytics, APM, ASM, Link Controller, and PEM 12.0.0 before HF1, when the TCP profile for a virtual server is configured with Congestion Metrics Cache enabled, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) restart) via crafted ICMP packets, related to Path MTU (PMTU) discovery.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-3455. CWE: CWE-20. CVSS: 2.5999999046325684. Squid 3.2.x before 3.2.14, 3.3.x before 3.3.14, 3.4.x before 3.4.13, and 3.5.x before 3.5.4, when configured with client-first SSL-bump, do not properly validate the domain or hostname fields of X.509 certificates, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof SSL servers via a valid certificate.