auren-research/cyber-sec huggingface dataset:
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--45e7f570-6a0b-4095-bf02-4bca05da6bae
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1036
external_id: T1036
source_name: Beechey 2010
description: Beechey, J. (2010, December). Application Whitelisting: Panacea or Propaganda?. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/application/application-whitelisting-panacea-propaganda-33599
source_name: Windows Commands JPCERT
description: Tomonaga, S. (2016, January 26). Windows Commands Abused by Attackers. Retrieved February 2, 2016.
url: https://blogs.jpcert.or.jp/en/2016/01/windows-commands-abused-by-attackers.html
source_name: NSA MS AppLocker
description: NSA Information Assurance Directorate. (2014, August). Application Whitelisting Using Microsoft AppLocker. Retrieved March 31, 2016.
url: https://apps.nsa.gov/iaarchive/library/ia-guidance/tech-briefs/application-whitelisting-using-microsoft-applocker.cfm
source_name: Corio 2008
description: Corio, C., & Sayana, D. P. (2008, June). Application Lockdown with Software Restriction Policies. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2008.06.srp.aspx
source_name: TechNet Applocker vs SRP
description: Microsoft. (2012, June 27). Using Software Restriction Policies and AppLocker Policies. Retrieved April 7, 2016.
url: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee791851.aspx
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:52.994Z
name: Masquerading Mitigation
description: When creating security rules, avoid exclusions based on file name or file path. Require signed binaries. Use file system access controls to protect folders such as C:\Windows\System32. Use tools that restrict program execution via whitelisting by attributes other than file name.

Identify potentially malicious software that may look like a legitimate program based on name and location, and audit and/or block it by using whitelisting (Citation: Beechey 2010) tools like AppLocker (Citation: Windows Commands JPCERT) (Citation: NSA MS AppLocker) or Software Restriction Policies (Citation: Corio 2008) where appropriate. (Citation: TechNet Applocker vs SRP)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--4689b9fb-dca4-473e-831b-34717ad50c97
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1102
external_id: T1102
source_name: University of Birmingham C2
description: Gardiner, J., Cova, M., Nagaraja, S. (2014, February). Command & Control Understanding, Denying and Detecting. Retrieved April 20, 2016.
url: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1136.pdf
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:53.168Z
name: Web Service Mitigation
description: Firewalls and Web proxies can be used to enforce external network communication policy. It may be difficult for an organization to block particular services because so many of them are commonly used during the course of business.

Network intrusion detection and prevention systems that use network signatures to identify traffic for specific adversary malware can be used to mitigate activity at the network level. Signatures are often for unique indicators within protocols and may be based on the specific protocol or encoded commands used by a particular adversary or tool, and will likely be different across various malware families and versions. Adversaries will likely change tool C2 signatures over time or construct protocols in such a way as to avoid detection by common defensive tools. (Citation: University of Birmingham C2)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--46acc565-11aa-40ba-b629-33ba0ab9b07b
created: 2019-04-24T16:59:33.603Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1496
external_id: T1496
source_name: Beechey 2010
description: Beechey, J. (2010, December). Application Whitelisting: Panacea or Propaganda?. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/application/application-whitelisting-panacea-propaganda-33599
source_name: Windows Commands JPCERT
description: Tomonaga, S. (2016, January 26). Windows Commands Abused by Attackers. Retrieved February 2, 2016.
url: http://blog.jpcert.or.jp/2016/01/windows-commands-abused-by-attackers.html
source_name: NSA MS AppLocker
description: NSA Information Assurance Directorate. (2014, August). Application Whitelisting Using Microsoft AppLocker. Retrieved March 31, 2016.
url: https://apps.nsa.gov/iaarchive/library/ia-guidance/tech-briefs/application-whitelisting-using-microsoft-applocker.cfm
source_name: Corio 2008
description: Corio, C., & Sayana, D. P. (2008, June). Application Lockdown with Software Restriction Policies. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2008.06.srp.aspx
source_name: TechNet Applocker vs SRP
description: Microsoft. (2012, June 27). Using Software Restriction Policies and AppLocker Policies. Retrieved April 7, 2016.
url: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee791851.aspx
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:53.345Z
name: Resource Hijacking Mitigation
description: Identify potentially malicious software and audit and/or block it by using whitelisting(Citation: Beechey 2010) tools, like AppLocker,(Citation: Windows Commands JPCERT)(Citation: NSA MS AppLocker) or Software Restriction Policies(Citation: Corio 2008) where appropriate.(Citation: TechNet Applocker vs SRP)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--46b7ef91-4e1d-43c5-a2eb-00fa9444f6f4
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1040
external_id: T1040
source_name: Beechey 2010
description: Beechey, J. (2010, December). Application Whitelisting: Panacea or Propaganda?. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/application/application-whitelisting-panacea-propaganda-33599
source_name: Windows Commands JPCERT
description: Tomonaga, S. (2016, January 26). Windows Commands Abused by Attackers. Retrieved February 2, 2016.
url: http://blog.jpcert.or.jp/2016/01/windows-commands-abused-by-attackers.html
source_name: NSA MS AppLocker
description: NSA Information Assurance Directorate. (2014, August). Application Whitelisting Using Microsoft AppLocker. Retrieved March 31, 2016.
url: https://apps.nsa.gov/iaarchive/library/ia-guidance/tech-briefs/application-whitelisting-using-microsoft-applocker.cfm
source_name: Corio 2008
description: Corio, C., & Sayana, D. P. (2008, June). Application Lockdown with Software Restriction Policies. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2008.06.srp.aspx
source_name: TechNet Applocker vs SRP
description: Microsoft. (2012, June 27). Using Software Restriction Policies and AppLocker Policies. Retrieved April 7, 2016.
url: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee791851.aspx
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:53.539Z
name: Network Sniffing Mitigation
description: Ensure that all wireless traffic is encrypted appropriately. Use Kerberos, SSL, and multifactor authentication wherever possible. Monitor switches and network for span port usage, ARP/DNS poisoning, and router reconfiguration.

Identify and block potentially malicious software that may be used to sniff or analyze network traffic by using whitelisting (Citation: Beechey 2010) tools, like AppLocker, (Citation: Windows Commands JPCERT) (Citation: NSA MS AppLocker) or Software Restriction Policies (Citation: Corio 2008) where appropriate. (Citation: TechNet Applocker vs SRP)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
modified: 2024-12-11T18:10:27.976Z
name: Execution Prevention
description: Prevent the execution of unauthorized or malicious code on systems by implementing application control, script blocking, and other execution prevention mechanisms. This ensures that only trusted and authorized code is executed, reducing the risk of malware and unauthorized actions. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures:

Application Control:

- Use Case: Use tools like AppLocker or Windows Defender Application Control (WDAC) to create whitelists of authorized applications and block unauthorized ones. On Linux, use tools like SELinux or AppArmor to define mandatory access control policies for application execution.
- Implementation: Allow only digitally signed or pre-approved applications to execute on servers and endpoints. (e.g., `New-AppLockerPolicy -PolicyType Enforced -FilePath "C:\Policies\AppLocker.xml"`) 


Script Blocking:

- Use Case: Use script control mechanisms to block unauthorized execution of scripts, such as PowerShell or JavaScript. Web Browsers: Use browser extensions or settings to block JavaScript execution from untrusted sources.
- Implementation: Configure PowerShell to enforce Constrained Language Mode for non-administrator users. (e.g., `Set-ExecutionPolicy AllSigned`) 

Executable Blocking:

- Use Case: Prevent execution of binaries from suspicious locations, such as `%TEMP%` or `%APPDATA%` directories.
- Implementation: Block execution of `.exe`, `.bat`, or `.ps1` files from user-writable directories.

Dynamic Analysis Prevention:
- Use Case: Use behavior-based execution prevention tools to identify and block malicious activity in real time.
- Implemenation: Employ EDR solutions that analyze runtime behavior and block suspicious code execution.
x_mitre_deprecated: no
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.3
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--47e0e9fe-96ce-4f65-8bb1-8be1feacb5db
created: 2019-06-11T16:35:25.488Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
revoked: no
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/M1038
external_id: M1038
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--49961e75-b493-423a-9ec7-ac2d6f55384a
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1201
external_id: T1201
source_name: Microsoft Password Complexity
description: Hall, J., Lich, B. (2017, September 9). Password must meet complexity requirements. Retrieved April 5, 2018.
url: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/security-policy-settings/password-must-meet-complexity-requirements
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:53.715Z
name: Password Policy Discovery Mitigation
description: Mitigating discovery of password policies is not advised since the information is required to be known by systems and users of a network. Ensure password policies are such that they mitigate brute force attacks yet will not give an adversary an information advantage because the policies are too light. Active Directory is a common way to set and enforce password policies throughout an enterprise network. (Citation: Microsoft Password Complexity)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
modified: 2024-12-10T18:55:27.646Z
name: Credential Access Protection
description: Credential Access Protection focuses on implementing measures to prevent adversaries from obtaining credentials, such as passwords, hashes, tokens, or keys, that could be used for unauthorized access. This involves restricting access to credential storage mechanisms, hardening configurations to block credential dumping methods, and using monitoring tools to detect suspicious credential-related activity. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures:

Restrict Access to Credential Storage:

- Use Case: Prevent adversaries from accessing the SAM (Security Account Manager) database on Windows systems.
- Implementation: Enforce least privilege principles and restrict administrative access to credential stores such as `C:\Windows\System32\config\SAM`.

Use Credential Guard:

- Use Case: Isolate LSASS (Local Security Authority Subsystem Service) memory to prevent credential dumping.
- Implementation: Enable Windows Defender Credential Guard on enterprise endpoints to isolate secrets and protect them from unauthorized access.

Monitor for Credential Dumping Tools:

- Use Case: Detect and block known tools like Mimikatz or Windows Credential Editor.
- Implementation: Flag suspicious process behavior related to credential dumping.

Disable Cached Credentials:

- Use Case: Prevent adversaries from exploiting cached credentials on endpoints.
- Implementation: Configure group policy to reduce or eliminate the use of cached credentials (e.g., set Interactive logon: Number of previous logons to cache to 0).

Enable Secure Boot and Memory Protections:

- Use Case: Prevent memory-based attacks used to extract credentials.
- Implementation: Configure Secure Boot and enforce hardware-based security features like DEP (Data Execution Prevention) and ASLR (Address Space Layout Randomization).
x_mitre_deprecated: no
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.2
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--49c06d54-9002-491d-9147-8efb537fbd26
created: 2019-06-11T16:47:12.859Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
revoked: no
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/M1043
external_id: M1043
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--4a99fecc-680b-448e-8fe7-8144c60d272c
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1110
external_id: T1110
source_name: NIST 800-63-3
description: Grassi, P., et al. (2017, December 1). SP 800-63-3, Digital Identity Guidelines. Retrieved January 16, 2019.
url: https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-3/sp800-63b.html
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:53.874Z
name: Brute Force Mitigation
description: Set account lockout policies after a certain number of failed login attempts to prevent passwords from being guessed. 
Too strict a policy can create a denial of service condition and render environments un-usable, with all accounts being locked-out permanently. Use multifactor authentication. Follow best practices for mitigating access to [Valid Accounts](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1078)

Refer to NIST guidelines when creating passwords.(Citation: NIST 800-63-3)

Where possible, also enable multi factor authentication on external facing services.
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.1
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--4b998a71-7b8f-4dcc-8f3f-277f2e740271
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1066
external_id: T1066
source_name: Beechey 2010
description: Beechey, J. (2010, December). Application Whitelisting: Panacea or Propaganda?. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/application/application-whitelisting-panacea-propaganda-33599
source_name: Windows Commands JPCERT
description: Tomonaga, S. (2016, January 26). Windows Commands Abused by Attackers. Retrieved February 2, 2016.
url: https://blogs.jpcert.or.jp/en/2016/01/windows-commands-abused-by-attackers.html
source_name: NSA MS AppLocker
description: NSA Information Assurance Directorate. (2014, August). Application Whitelisting Using Microsoft AppLocker. Retrieved March 31, 2016.
url: https://www.iad.gov/iad/library/ia-guidance/tech-briefs/application-whitelisting-using-microsoft-applocker.cfm
source_name: Corio 2008
description: Corio, C., & Sayana, D. P. (2008, June). Application Lockdown with Software Restriction Policies. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
url: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2008.06.srp.aspx
source_name: TechNet Applocker vs SRP
description: Microsoft. (2012, June 27). Using Software Restriction Policies and AppLocker Policies. Retrieved April 7, 2016.
url: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee791851.aspx
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:54.080Z
name: Indicator Removal from Tools Mitigation
description: Mitigation is difficult in instances like this because the adversary may have access to the system through another channel and can learn what techniques or tools are blocked by resident defenses. Exercising best practices with configuration and security as well as ensuring that proper process is followed during investigation of potential compromise is essential to detecting a larger intrusion through discrete alerts.

Identify and block potentially malicious software that may be used by an adversary by using whitelisting (Citation: Beechey 2010) tools like AppLocker (Citation: Windows Commands JPCERT) (Citation: NSA MS AppLocker) or Software Restriction Policies (Citation: Corio 2008) where appropriate. (Citation: TechNet Applocker vs SRP)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--4f170666-7edb-4489-85c2-9affa28a72e0
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1156
external_id: T1156
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:54.257Z
name: .bash_profile and .bashrc Mitigation
description: Making these files immutable and only changeable by certain administrators will limit the ability for adversaries to easily create user level persistence.
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--51048ba0-a5aa-41e7-bf5d-993cd217dfb2
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1216
external_id: T1216
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:54.428Z
name: Signed Script Proxy Execution Mitigation
description: Certain signed scripts that can be used to execute other programs may not be necessary within a given environment. Use application whitelisting configured to block execution of these scripts if they are not required for a given system or network to prevent potential misuse by adversaries.
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--514e7371-a344-4de7-8ec3-3aa42b801d52
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1104
external_id: T1104
source_name: University of Birmingham C2
description: Gardiner, J., Cova, M., Nagaraja, S. (2014, February). Command & Control Understanding, Denying and Detecting. Retrieved April 20, 2016.
url: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1136.pdf
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:54.629Z
name: Multi-Stage Channels Mitigation
description: Command and control infrastructure used in a multi-stage channel may be blocked if known ahead of time. If unique signatures are present in the C2 traffic, they could also be used as the basis of identifying and blocking the channel. (Citation: University of Birmingham C2)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--515f6584-fa98-44fe-a4e8-e428c7188514
created: 2018-10-17T00:14:20.652Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1008
external_id: T1008
source_name: University of Birmingham C2
description: Gardiner, J., Cova, M., Nagaraja, S. (2014, February). Command & Control Understanding, Denying and Detecting. Retrieved April 20, 2016.
url: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1136.pdf
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T17:59:54.798Z
name: Fallback Channels Mitigation
description: Network intrusion detection and prevention systems that use network signatures to identify traffic for specific adversary malware can be used to mitigate activity at the network level. Signatures are often for unique indicators within protocols and may be based on the specific protocol used by a particular adversary or tool, and will likely be different across various malware families and versions. Adversaries will likely change tool C2 signatures over time or construct protocols in such a way as to avoid detection by common defensive tools. (Citation: University of Birmingham C2)
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: yes
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.0
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0