LoFP LoFP / false positive may vary depends on the score you want to check. the bigger number of path traversal string count the better.

Techniques

Sample rules

Windows Command and Scripting Interpreter Hunting Path Traversal

Description

The following analytic identifies path traversal command-line execution and should be used to tune and driver other more higher fidelity analytics. This technique was seen in malicious document that execute malicious code using msdt.exe and path traversal technique that serve as defense evasion. This Hunting query is a good pivot to look for possible suspicious process and command-line that runs execute path traversal technique to run malicious code. This may help you to find possible downloaded malware or other lolbin execution.

Detection logic


| tstats `security_content_summariesonly` count min(_time) as firstTime max(_time) as lastTime FROM datamodel=Endpoint.Processes  by Processes.original_file_name Processes.process_id Processes.parent_process_id Processes.process_hash Processes.dest Processes.user Processes.parent_process_name Processes.process_name Processes.process 
| `drop_dm_object_name("Processes")` 
| `security_content_ctime(firstTime)` 
| `security_content_ctime(lastTime)` 
| eval count_of_pattern1 = (mvcount(split(process,"/.."))-1) 
| eval count_of_pattern2 = (mvcount(split(process,"\.."))-1) 
| eval count_of_pattern3 = (mvcount(split(process,"\\.."))-1) 
| eval count_of_pattern4 = (mvcount(split(process,"//.."))-1) 
| search count_of_pattern1 > 1 OR count_of_pattern2 > 1 OR count_of_pattern3 > 1 OR count_of_pattern4 > 1 
| `windows_command_and_scripting_interpreter_hunting_path_traversal_filter`