auren-research/cyber-sec huggingface dataset:
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--a1482e43-f3ff-4fbd-94de-ad1244738166
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/T1209
external_id: T1209
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: Microsoft W32Time May 2017
description: Mathers, B. (2017, May 31). Windows Time Service Tools and Settings. Retrieved March 26, 2018.
url: https://docs.microsoft.com/windows-server/networking/windows-time-service/windows-time-service-tools-and-settings
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T18:00:07.267Z
name: Time Providers Mitigation
description: Identify and block potentially malicious software that may be executed as a time provider by using whitelisting (Citation: Beechey 2010) tools, like AppLocker, (Citation: Windows Commands JPCERT) (Citation: NSA MS AppLocker) that are capable of auditing and/or blocking unknown DLLs.

Consider using Group Policy to configure and block subsequent modifications to W32Time parameters. (Citation: Microsoft W32Time May 2017)
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: 2024-12-24T13:34:49.309Z
name: Restrict Registry Permissions
description: Restricting registry permissions involves configuring access control settings for sensitive registry keys and hives to ensure that only authorized users or processes can make modifications. By limiting access, organizations can prevent unauthorized changes that adversaries might use for persistence, privilege escalation, or defense evasion. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures:

Review and Adjust Permissions on Critical Keys

- Regularly review permissions on keys such as `Run`, `RunOnce`, and `Services` to ensure only authorized users have write access.
- Use tools like `icacls` or `PowerShell` to automate permission adjustments.

Enable Registry Auditing

- Enable auditing on sensitive keys to log access attempts.
- Use Event Viewer or SIEM solutions to analyze logs and detect suspicious activity.
- Example Audit Policy: `auditpol /set /subcategory:"Registry" /success:enable /failure:enable`

Protect Credential-Related Hives

- Limit access to hives like `SAM`,`SECURITY`, and `SYSTEM` to prevent credential dumping or other unauthorized access.
- Use LSA Protection to add an additional security layer for credential storage.

Restrict Registry Editor Usage

- Use Group Policy to restrict access to regedit.exe for non-administrative users.
- Block execution of registry editing tools on endpoints where they are unnecessary.

Deploy Baseline Configuration Tools

- Use tools like Microsoft Security Compliance Toolkit or CIS Benchmarks to apply and maintain secure registry configurations.

*Tools for Implementation* 

Registry Permission Tools:

- Registry Editor (regedit): Built-in tool to manage registry permissions.
- PowerShell: Automate permissions and manage keys. `Set-ItemProperty -Path "HKLM:\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run" -Name "KeyName" -Value "Value"`
- icacls: Command-line tool to modify ACLs.

Monitoring Tools:

- Sysmon: Monitor and log registry events.
- Event Viewer: View registry access logs.

Policy Management Tools:

- Group Policy Management Console (GPMC): Enforce registry permissions via GPOs.
- Microsoft Endpoint Manager: Deploy configuration baselines for registry permissions.
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--a2c36a5d-4058-475e-8e77-fff75e50d3b9
created: 2019-06-06T20:58:59.577Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
revoked: no
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/M1024
external_id: M1024
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--a3e12b04-8598-4909-8855-2c97c1e7d549
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/T1208
external_id: T1208
source_name: AdSecurity Cracking Kerberos Dec 2015
description: Metcalf, S. (2015, December 31). Cracking Kerberos TGS Tickets Using Kerberoast – Exploiting Kerberos to Compromise the Active Directory Domain. Retrieved March 22, 2018.
url: https://adsecurity.org/?p=2293
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T18:00:07.445Z
name: Kerberoasting Mitigation
description: Ensure strong password length (ideally 25+ characters) and complexity for service accounts and that these passwords periodically expire. (Citation: AdSecurity Cracking Kerberos Dec 2015) Also consider using Group Managed Service Accounts or another third party product such as password vaulting. (Citation: AdSecurity Cracking Kerberos Dec 2015)

Limit service accounts to minimal required privileges, including membership in privileged groups such as Domain Administrators. (Citation: AdSecurity Cracking Kerberos Dec 2015)

Enable AES Kerberos encryption (or another stronger encryption algorithm), rather than RC4, where possible. (Citation: AdSecurity Cracking Kerberos Dec 2015)
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--a569295c-a093-4db4-9fb4-7105edef85ad
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/T1024
external_id: T1024
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: 2025-04-18T18:00:07.631Z
name: Custom Cryptographic Protocol 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. Since the custom protocol used may not adhere to typical protocol standards, there may be opportunities to signature the traffic on a network level for detection. 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
type: course-of-action
spec_version: 2.1
id: course-of-action--a766ce73-5583-48f3-b7c0-0bb43c6ef8c7
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/T1032
external_id: T1032
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: 2025-04-18T18:00:07.802Z
name: Standard Cryptographic Protocol 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. Use of encryption protocols may make typical network-based C2 detection more difficult due to a reduced ability to signature the traffic. Prior knowledge of adversary C2 infrastructure may be useful for domain and IP address blocking, but will likely not be an effective long-term solution because adversaries can change infrastructure often. (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--a90da496-b460-47e8-92e7-cc36eb00bd9a
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/T1121
external_id: T1121
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T18:00:08.000Z
name: Regsvcs/Regasm Mitigation
description: Regsvcs and Regasm may not be necessary within a given environment. Block execution of Regsvcs.exe and Regasm.exe 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--a98be93b-a75b-4dd4-8a72-4dfd0b5e25bb
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/T1011
external_id: T1011
source_name: Microsoft GPO Bluetooth FEB 2009
description: Microsoft. (2009, February 9). Disabling Bluetooth and Infrared Beaming. Retrieved July 26, 2018.
url: https://technet.microsoft.com/library/dd252791.aspx
source_name: TechRepublic Wireless GPO FEB 2009
description: Schauland, D. (2009, February 24). Configuring Wireless settings via Group Policy. Retrieved July 26, 2018.
url: https://www.techrepublic.com/blog/data-center/configuring-wireless-settings-via-group-policy/
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T18:00:08.169Z
name: Exfiltration Over Other Network Medium Mitigation
description: Ensure host-based sensors maintain visibility into usage of all network adapters and prevent the creation of new ones where possible. (Citation: Microsoft GPO Bluetooth FEB 2009) (Citation: TechRepublic Wireless GPO FEB 2009)
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--aaa92b37-f96c-4a0a-859c-b1cb6faeb13d
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/T1061
external_id: T1061
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: 2025-04-18T18:00:08.494Z
name: Graphical User Interface Mitigation
description: Prevent adversaries from gaining access to credentials through Credential Access that can be used to log into remote desktop sessions on systems.

Identify unnecessary system utilities, third-party tools, or potentially malicious software that may be used to log into remote interactive sessions, and audit and/or block them by using whitelisting (Citation: Beechey 2010) tools, like AppLocker (Citation: Windows Commands JPCERT) (Citation: NSA MS AppLocker) and 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--ace4daee-f914-4707-be75-843f16da2edf
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/T1139
external_id: T1139
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T18:00:09.360Z
name: Bash History Mitigation
description: There are multiple methods of preventing a user's command history from being flushed to their .bash_history file, including use of the following commands:
set +o history and set -o history to start logging again;
unset HISTFILE being added to a user's .bash_rc file; and
ln -s /dev/null ~/.bash_history to write commands to /dev/nullinstead.
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--ad7f983d-d5a8-4fce-a38c-b68eda61bf4e
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/T1192
external_id: T1192
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T18:00:09.558Z
name: Spearphishing Link Mitigation
description: Because this technique involves user interaction on the endpoint, it's difficult to fully mitigate. However, there are potential mitigations. Users can be trained to identify social engineering techniques and spearphishing emails with malicious links. Determine if certain websites that can be used for spearphishing are necessary for business operations and consider blocking access if activity cannot be monitored well or if it poses a significant risk. Other mitigations can take place as [User Execution](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1204) occurs.
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--ae56a49d-5281-45c5-ab95-70a1439c338e
created: 2019-04-25T20:53:07.814Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/T1500
external_id: T1500
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: 2025-04-18T18:00:09.726Z
name: Compile After Delivery Mitigation
description: This type of technique cannot be easily mitigated with preventive controls or patched since it is based on the abuse of operating system design features. For example, blocking all file compilation may have unintended side effects, such as preventing legitimate OS frameworks and code development mechanisms from operating properly. Consider removing compilers if not needed, otherwise efforts should be focused on preventing adversary tools from running earlier in the chain of activity and on identifying subsequent malicious behavior.

Identify unnecessary system utilities or potentially malicious software that may be used to decrypt, deobfuscate, decode, and compile files or information, and audit and/or block them 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--af093bc8-7b59-4e2a-9da8-8e839b4c50c6
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/T1219
external_id: T1219
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-04-18T18:00:10.121Z
name: Remote Access Tools Mitigation
description: Properly configure firewalls, application firewalls, and proxies to limit outgoing traffic to sites and services used by remote access tools.

Network intrusion detection and prevention systems that use network signatures may be able to prevent traffic to these services as well.

Use application whitelisting to mitigate use of and installation of unapproved software.
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--b045d015-6bed-4490-bd38-56b41ece59a0
created: 2019-06-10T20:53:36.319Z
created_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
revoked: no
external_references: source_name: mitre-attack
url: https://attack.mitre.org/mitigations/M1032
external_id: M1032
object_marking_refs: marking-definition--fa42a846-8d90-4e51-bc29-71d5b4802168
modified: 2025-05-09T15:48:18.053Z
name: Multi-factor Authentication
description: Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) enhances security by requiring users to provide at least two forms of verification to prove their identity before granting access. These factors typically include:

- *Something you know*: Passwords, PINs.
- *Something you have*: Physical tokens, smartphone authenticator apps.
- *Something you are*: Biometric data such as fingerprints, facial recognition, or retinal scans.

Implementing MFA across all critical systems and services ensures robust protection against account takeover and unauthorized access. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures:

Identity and Access Management (IAM):

- Use IAM solutions like Azure Active Directory, Okta, or AWS IAM to enforce MFA policies for all user logins, especially for privileged roles.
- Enable conditional access policies to enforce MFA for risky sign-ins (e.g., unfamiliar devices, geolocations).
- Enable Conditional Access policies to only allow logins from trusted devices, such as those enrolled in Intune or joined via Hybrid/Entra.

Authentication Tools and Methods:

- Use authenticator applications such as Google Authenticator, Microsoft Authenticator, or Authy for time-based one-time passwords (TOTP).
- Deploy hardware-based tokens like YubiKey, RSA SecurID, or smart cards for additional security.
- Enforce biometric authentication for compatible devices and applications.

Secure Legacy Systems:

- Integrate MFA solutions with older systems using third-party tools like Duo Security or Thales SafeNet.
- Enable RADIUS/NPS servers to facilitate MFA for VPNs, RDP, and other network logins.

Monitoring and Alerting:

- Use SIEM tools to monitor failed MFA attempts, login anomalies, or brute-force attempts against MFA systems.
- Implement alerts for suspicious MFA activities, such as repeated failed codes or new device registrations.

Training and Policy Enforcement:

- Educate employees on the importance of MFA and secure authenticator usage.
- Enforce policies that require MFA on all critical systems, especially for remote access, privileged accounts, and cloud applications.
x_mitre_modified_by_ref: identity--c78cb6e5-0c4b-4611-8297-d1b8b55e40b5
x_mitre_deprecated: no
x_mitre_domains: enterprise-attack
x_mitre_version: 1.1
x_mitre_attack_spec_version: 3.2.0