Home/ATT&CK Technique/Windows Service
ATT&CK Technique

Windows Service

T1543.003 · persistence, privilege-escalation

Adversaries may create or modify Windows services to repeatedly execute malicious payloads as part of persistence. When Windows boots up, it starts programs or applications called services that perform background system functions. Windows service configuration information, including the file path to the service's executable or recovery programs/commands, is stored in the Windows Registry.

Adversaries may install a new service or modify an existing service to execute at startup in order to persist on a system. Service configurations can be set or modified using system utilities (such as sc.exe), by directly modifying the Registry, or by interacting directly with the Windows API. Adversaries may also use services to install and execute malicious drivers.

For example, after dropping a driver file (ex: .sys) to disk, the payload can be loaded and registered via Native API functions such as CreateServiceW() (or manually via functions such as ZwLoadDriver() and ZwSetValueKey()), by creating the required service Registry values (i.e. Modify Registry), or by using command-line utilities such as PnPUtil.exe. Adversaries may leverage these drivers as Rootkits to hide the presence of malicious activity on a system.

Adversaries may also load a signed yet vulnerable driver onto a compromised machine (known as "Bring Your Own Vulnerable Driver" (BYOVD)) as part of Exploitation for Privilege Escalation. Services may be created with administrator privileges but are executed under SYSTEM privileges, so an adversary may also use a service to escalate privileges. Adversaries may also directly start services through Service Execution.

To make detection analysis more challenging, malicious services may also incorporate Masquerade Task or Service (ex: using a service and/or payload name related to a legitimate OS or benign software component). Adversaries may also create ‘hidden’ services (i.e., Hide Artifacts), for example by using the sc sdset command to set service permissions via the Service Descriptor Definition Language (SDDL). This may hide a Windows service from the view of standard service enumeration methods such as Get-Service, sc query, and services.exe.

Windows

Actors Using This

14
iranAgrius
russia_speaking_cybercrimeAkira
russia_speaking_cybercrimeALPHV / BlackCat
latin_america_brazilian_organized_cybercrimeAmavaldo
north_koreaAndariel
unknown_likely_russia_alignedAnubis Ransomware
chinaAPT10
chinaAPT17
chinaAPT1
chinaAPT31
iranAPT33
iranOilRig

Atomic Tests

6
Executable Atomic Red Team test cases for exercising this technique in a lab. Copy a command, run it on the listed platform, confirm your detections fire.
command_promptelevatedwindowsModify Fax service to run PowerShell
This test will temporarily modify the service Fax by changing the binPath to PowerShell and will then revert the binPath change, restoring Fax to its original state. Upon successful execution, cmd will modify the binpath for `Fax` to spawn powershell. Powershell will then spawn.
sc config #{service_name} binPath= "C:\windows\system32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\powershell.exe -noexit -c \"write-host 'T1543.003 Test'\""
sc start #{service_name}
command_promptelevatedwindowsService Installation CMD
Download an executable from github and start it as a service. Upon successful execution, powershell will download `AtomicService.exe` from github. cmd.exe will spawn sc.exe which will create and start the service. Results will output via stdout.
sc.exe create #{service_name} binPath= "#{binary_path}" start=#{startup_type}  type=#{service_type}
sc.exe start #{service_name}
powershellelevatedwindowsService Installation PowerShell
Installs A Local Service via PowerShell. Upon successful execution, powershell will download `AtomicService.exe` from github. Powershell will then use `New-Service` and `Start-Service` to start service. Results will be displayed.
New-Service -Name "#{service_name}" -BinaryPathName "#{binary_path}"
Start-Service -Name "#{service_name}"
command_promptelevatedwindowsTinyTurla backdoor service w64time
It's running Dll as service to emulate the TinyTurla backdoor [Related Talos Blog](https://blog.talosintelligence.com/2021/09/tinyturla.html)
copy "#{dllfilename}" %systemroot%\system32\
sc create W64Time binPath= "c:\Windows\System32\svchost.exe -k TimeService" type= share start=auto
sc config W64Time DisplayName= "Windows 64 Time"
sc description W64Time "Maintain date and time synch on all clients and services in the network"
reg add "HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Svchost" /v TimeService /t REG_MULTI_SZ /d "W64Time" /f
reg add "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\W64Time\Parameters" /v ServiceDll /t REG_EXPAND_SZ /d "%systemroot%\system32\w64time.dll" /f
sc start W64Time
command_promptelevatedwindowsRemote Service Installation CMD
Download an executable from github and start it as a service on a remote endpoint Upon successful execution, powershell will download `AtomicService.exe` from github. cmd.exe will spawn sc.exe which will create and start the service. Results will output via stdout.
sc.exe \\#{remote_host} create #{service_name} binPath= "#{binary_path}" start=#{startup_type} type=#{service_type}
sc.exe \\#{remote_host} start #{service_name}
powershellelevatedwindowsModify Service to Run Arbitrary Binary (Powershell)
This test will use PowerShell to temporarily modify a service to run an arbitrary executable by changing its binary path and will then revert the binary path change, restoring the service to its original state. This technique was previously observed through SnapMC's use of Powerspolit's invoke-serviceabuse function. [Reference](https://blog.fox-it.com/2021/10/11/snapmc-skips-ransomware-steals-data/)
Stop-Service -Name "#{service_name}" -force -erroraction silentlycontinue | Out-Null
set-servicebinarypath -name "#{service_name}" -path "#{new_bin_path}"
start-service -Name "#{service_name}" -erroraction silentlycontinue | out-null

Mitigations

5
MITRE ATT&CK mitigations - vendor-agnostic guidance for reducing exposure to this technique.
M1018User Account Management

User Account Management involves implementing and enforcing policies for the lifecycle of user accounts, including creation, modification, and deactivation. Proper account management reduces the attack surface by limiting unauthorized access, managing account privileges, and ensuring accounts are used according to organizational policies.

Enforcing the Principle of Least Privilege
  • Implementation: Assign users only the minimum permissions required to perform their job functions. Regularly audit accounts to ensure no excess permissions are granted.
  • Use Case: Reduces the risk of privilege escalation by ensuring accounts cannot perform unauthorized actions. Implementing Strong Password Policies.
  • Implementation: Enforce password complexity requirements (e.g., length, character types). Require password expiration every 90 days and disallow password reuse.
  • Use Case: Prevents adversaries from gaining unauthorized access through password guessing or brute force attacks. Managing Dormant and Orphaned Accounts.
  • Implementation: Implement automated workflows to disable accounts after a set period of inactivity (e.g., 30 days). Remove orphaned accounts (e.g., accounts without an assigned owner) during regular account audits.
  • Use Case: Eliminates dormant accounts that could be exploited by attackers. Account Lockout Policies.
  • Implementation: Configure account lockout thresholds (e.g., lock accounts after five failed login attempts). Set lockout durations to a minimum of 15 minutes.
  • Use Case: Mitigates automated attack techniques that rely on repeated login attempts. Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) for High-Risk Accounts.
  • Implementation: Require MFA for all administrative accounts and high-risk users. Use MFA mechanisms like hardware tokens, authenticator apps, or biometrics.
  • Use Case: Prevents unauthorized access, even if credentials are stolen. Restricting Interactive Logins.
  • Implementation: Restrict interactive logins for privileged accounts to specific secure systems or management consoles. Use group policies to enforce logon restrictions.
  • Use Case: Protects sensitive accounts from misuse or exploitation.
Tools for Implementation Built-in Tools
  • Microsoft Active Directory (AD): Centralized account management and RBAC enforcement.
  • Group Policy Object (GPO): Enforce password policies, logon restrictions, and account lockout policies.
Identity and Access Management (IAM) Tools
  • Okta: Centralized user provisioning, MFA, and SSO integration.
  • Microsoft Azure Active Directory: Provides advanced account lifecycle management, role-based access, and conditional access policies.
Privileged Account Management (PAM)
  • CyberArk, BeyondTrust, Thycotic: Manage and monitor privileged account usage, enforce session recording, and JIT access.
M1028Operating System Configuration

Operating System Configuration involves adjusting system settings and hardening the default configurations of an operating system (OS) to mitigate adversary exploitation and prevent abuse of system functionality. Proper OS configurations address security vulnerabilities, limit attack surfaces, and ensure robust defense against a wide range of techniques.

Disable Unused Features
  • Turn off SMBv1, LLMNR, and NetBIOS where not needed.
  • Disable remote registry and unnecessary services.
Enforce OS-level Protections
  • Enable Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), and Control Flow Guard (CFG) on Windows.
  • Use AppArmor or SELinux on Linux for mandatory access controls.
Secure Access Settings
  • Enable User Account Control (UAC) for Windows.
  • Restrict root/sudo access on Linux/macOS and enforce strong permissions using sudoers files.
File System Hardening
  • Implement least-privilege access for critical files and system directories.
  • Audit permissions regularly using tools like icacls (Windows) or getfacl/chmod (Linux/macOS).
Secure Remote Access
  • Restrict RDP, SSH, and VNC to authorized IPs using firewall rules.
  • Enable NLA for RDP and enforce strong password/lockout policies.
Harden Boot Configurations
  • Enable Secure Boot and enforce UEFI/BIOS password protection.
  • Use BitLocker or LUKS to encrypt boot drives.
Regular Audits
  • Periodically audit OS configurations using tools like CIS Benchmarks or SCAP tools.
Tools for Implementation Windows
  • Microsoft Group Policy Objects (GPO): Centrally enforce OS security settings.
  • Windows Defender Exploit Guard: Built-in OS protection against exploits.
  • CIS-CAT Pro: Audit Windows security configurations based on CIS Benchmarks.
Linux/macOS
  • AppArmor/SELinux: Enforce mandatory access controls.
  • Lynis: Perform comprehensive security audits.
  • SCAP Security Guide: Automate configuration hardening using Security Content Automation Protocol.
Cross-Platform
  • Ansible or Chef/Puppet: Automate configuration hardening at scale.
  • OpenSCAP: Perform compliance and configuration checks.
M1040Behavior Prevention on Endpoint

Behavior Prevention on Endpoint refers to the use of technologies and strategies to detect and block potentially malicious activities by analyzing the behavior of processes, files, API calls, and other endpoint events. Rather than relying solely on known signatures, this approach leverages heuristics, machine learning, and real-time monitoring to identify anomalous patterns indicative of an attack.

Suspicious Process Behavior
  • Implementation: Use Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools to monitor and block processes exhibiting unusual behavior, such as privilege escalation attempts.
  • Use Case: An attacker uses a known vulnerability to spawn a privileged process from a user-level application. The endpoint tool detects the abnormal parent-child process relationship and blocks the action.
Unauthorized File Access
  • Implementation: Leverage Data Loss Prevention (DLP) or endpoint tools to block processes attempting to access sensitive files without proper authorization.
  • Use Case: A process tries to read or modify a sensitive file located in a restricted directory, such as /etc/shadow on Linux or the SAM registry hive on Windows. The endpoint tool identifies this anomalous behavior and prevents it.
Abnormal API Calls
  • Implementation: Implement runtime analysis tools to monitor API calls and block those associated with malicious activities.
  • Use Case: A process dynamically injects itself into another process to hijack its execution. The endpoint detects the abnormal use of APIs like OpenProcess and WriteProcessMemory and terminates the offending process.
Exploit Prevention
  • Implementation: Use behavioral exploit prevention tools to detect and block exploits attempting to gain unauthorized access.
  • Use Case: A buffer overflow exploit is launched against a vulnerable application. The endpoint detects the anomalous memory write operation and halts the process.
M1045Code Signing

Code Signing is a security process that ensures the authenticity and integrity of software by digitally signing executables, scripts, and other code artifacts. It prevents untrusted or malicious code from executing by verifying the digital signatures against trusted sources. Code signing protects against tampering, impersonation, and distribution of unauthorized or malicious software, forming a critical defense against supply chain and software exploitation attacks.

Enforce Signed Code Execution
  • Implementation: Configure operating systems (e.g., Windows with AppLocker or Linux with Secure Boot) to allow only signed code to execute.
  • Use Case: Prevent the execution of malicious PowerShell scripts by requiring all scripts to be signed with a trusted certificate.
Vendor-Signed Driver Enforcement
  • Implementation: Enable kernel-mode code signing to ensure that only drivers signed by trusted vendors can be loaded.
  • Use Case: A malicious driver attempting to modify system memory fails to load because it lacks a valid signature.
Certificate Revocation Management
  • Implementation: Use Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) or Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs) to block certificates associated with compromised or deprecated code.
  • Use Case: A compromised certificate used to sign a malicious update is revoked, preventing further execution of the software.
Third-Party Software Verification
  • Implementation: Require software from external vendors to be signed with valid certificates before deployment.
  • Use Case: An organization only deploys signed and verified third-party software to prevent supply chain attacks.
Script Integrity in CI/CD Pipelines
  • Implementation: Integrate code signing into CI/CD pipelines to sign and verify code artifacts before production release.
  • Use Case: A software company ensures that all production builds are signed, preventing tampered builds from reaching customers. Key Components of Code Signing.
  • Digital Signature Verification: Verifies the authenticity of code by ensuring it was signed by a trusted entity.
  • Certificate Management: Uses Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) to manage signing certificates and revocation lists.
  • Enforced Policy for Unsigned Code: Prevents the execution of unsigned or untrusted binaries and scripts.
  • Hash Integrity Check: Confirms that code has not been altered since signing by comparing cryptographic hashes.
M1047Audit

Auditing is the process of recording activity and systematically reviewing and analyzing the activity and system configurations. The primary purpose of auditing is to detect anomalies and identify potential threats or weaknesses in the environment. Proper auditing configurations can also help to meet compliance requirements.

The process of auditing encompasses regular analysis of user behaviors and system logs in support of proactive security measures. Auditing is applicable to all systems used within an organization, from the front door of a building to accessing a file on a fileserver. It is considered more critical for regulated industries such as, healthcare, finance and government where compliance requirements demand stringent tracking of user and system activates.

System Audit
  • Use Case: Regularly assess system configurations to ensure compliance with organizational security policies.
  • Implementation: Use tools to scan for deviations from established benchmarks.
Permission Audits
  • Use Case: Review file and folder permissions to minimize the risk of unauthorized access or privilege escalation.
  • Implementation: Run access reviews to identify users or groups with excessive permissions.
Software Audits
  • Use Case: Identify outdated, unsupported, or insecure software that could serve as an attack vector.
  • Implementation: Use inventory and vulnerability scanning tools to detect outdated versions and recommend secure alternatives.
Configuration Audits
  • Use Case: Evaluate system and network configurations to ensure secure settings (e.g., disabled SMBv1, enabled MFA).
  • Implementation: Implement automated configuration scanning tools like SCAP (Security Content Automation Protocol) to identify non-compliant systems.
Network Audits
  • Use Case: Examine network traffic, firewall rules, and endpoint communications to identify unauthorized or insecure connections.
  • Implementation: Utilize tools such as Wireshark, or Zeek to monitor and log suspicious network behavior.

Detection Coverage

2/6 layers
Coverage across standard detection surfaces. Rows marked none have no rule of that type mapped. Some are real blind spots worth closing; others are simply not applicable to this technique (e.g. YARA matches malware files, not network behaviour).
Behavioral / log (Sigma) 38
Analytics (MITRE CAR) 6
Runtime / container (Falco) none
File / malware (YARA) none
Network (Suricata/Snort) none
Vuln scan (Nuclei) none

CAR Analytics

6
MITRE Cyber Analytics Repository - field-tested detection logic for this technique, written as pseudocode/queries you adapt to your own SIEM (Splunk, Sentinel, EQL). Each is a ready starting point for a detection rule, not just a description.
CAR-2013-01-002Moderate coverageAutorun Differences

The Sysinternals tool [Autoruns](../sensors/autoruns) checks the registry and file system for known identify persistence mechanisms. It will output any tools identified, including built-in or added-on Microsoft functionality and third party software. Many of these locations are known by adversaries and used to obtain Persistence.

Running Autoruns periodically in an environment makes it possible to collect and monitor its output for differences, which may include the removal or addition of persistent tools. Depending on the persistence mechanism and location, legitimate software may be more likely to make changes than an adversary tool. Thus, this analytic may result in significant noise in a highly dynamic environment.

While Autoruns is a convenient method to scan for programs using persistence mechanisms its scanning nature does not conform well to streaming based analytics. This analytic could be replaced with one that draws from sensors that collect registry and file information if streaming analytics are desired. Utilizes the Sysinternals autoruns tool (ignoring validated Microsoft entries).

Primarily not a detection analytic by itself but through analysis of results by an analyst can be used for such. Building another analytic on top of this one identifying unusual entries would likely be a beneficial alternative.

CAR-2013-04-002Low coverageQuick execution of a series of suspicious commands

Certain commands are frequently used by malicious actors and infrequently used by normal users. By looking for execution of these commands in short periods of time, we can not only see when a malicious user was on the system but also get an idea of what they were doing.

Commands of interest
  • arp.exe.
  • at.exe.
  • attrib.exe.
  • cscript.exe.
  • dsquery.exe.
  • hostname.exe.
  • ipconfig.exe.
  • mimikatz.exe.
  • nbstat.exe.
  • net.exe.
  • netsh.exe.
  • nslookup.exe.
  • ping.exe.
  • quser.exe.
  • qwinsta.exe.
  • reg.exe.
  • runas.exe.
  • sc.exe.
  • schtasks.exe.
  • ssh.exe.
  • systeminfo.exe.
  • taskkill.exe.
  • telnet.exe.
  • tracert.exe.
  • wscript.exe.
  • xcopy.exe ### Output Description The host on which the commands were executed, the time of execution, and what commands were executed.
pseudocode
processes = search Process:Create
reg_processes = filter processes where (exe == "arp.exe" or exe == "at.exe" or exe == "attrib.exe"
 or exe == "cscript.exe" or exe == "dsquery.exe" or exe == "hostname.exe"
 or exe == "ipconfig.exe" or exe == "mimikatz.exe" or exe == "nbstat.exe"
 or exe == "net.exe" or exe == "netsh.exe" or exe == "nslookup.exe"
 or exe == "ping.exe" or exe == "quser.exe" or exe == "qwinsta.exe"
 or exe == "reg.exe" or exe == "runas.exe" or exe == "sc.exe"
 or exe == "schtasks.exe" or exe == "ssh.exe" or exe == "systeminfo.exe"
 or exe == "taskkill.exe" or exe == "telnet.exe" or exe == "tracert.exe"
 or exe == "wscript.exe" or exe == "xcopy.exe")
reg_grouped = group reg by hostname, ppid where(max time between two events is 30 minutes)
output reg_grouped
DNIF
_fetch * from event where $LogName=WINDOWS-SYSMON AND $EventID=1 AND $App=regex(arp\.exe|at\.exe|attrib\.exe|cscript\.exe|dsquery\.exe|hostname\.exe|ipconfig\.exe|mimikatz.exe|nbstat\.exe|net\.exe|netsh\.exe|nslookup\.exe|ping\.exe|quser\.exe|qwinsta\.exe|reg\.exe|runas\.exe|sc\.exe|schtasks\.exe|ssh\.exe|systeminfo\.exe|taskkill\.exe|telnet\.exe|tracert\.exe|wscript\.exe|xcopy\.exe)i group count_unique $App limit 100
>>_agg count
>>_checkif int_compare Count > 1 include
LogPoint
norm_id=WindowsSysmon event_id=1 image IN ["*\arp.exe", "*\at.exe", "*\attrib.exe", "*\cscript.exe", "*\dsquery.exe", "*\hostname.exe", "*\ipconfig.exe", "*\mimikatz.exe", "*\nbstat.exe", "*\net.exe", "*\netsh.exe", "*\nslookup.exe", "*\ping.exe", "*\quser.exe", "*\qwinsta.exe", "*\reg.exe", "*\runas.exe", "*\sc.exe", "*\schtasks.exe", "*\ssh.exe", "*\systeminfo.exe", "*\taskkill.exe", "*\telnet.exe", "*\tracert.exe", "*\wscript.exe", "*\xcopy.exe"]
| chart count() as cnt by host
| search cnt > 1
CAR-2013-09-005Moderate coverageService Outlier Executables

New executables that are started as a service are suspicious. This analytic looks for anomalous service executables.

pseudocode
processes = search Process:Create
services = filter processes where (parent_image_path == "C:\Windows\System32\services.exe")
historic_services = filter services (where timestamp < now - 1 day AND timestamp > now - 1 day)
current_services = filter services (where timestamp >= now - 1 day)
new_services = historic_services - current_services
output new_services
LogPoint
norm_id=WinServer event_id=7045
| chart count() as cnt by file
| search cnt < 5
CAR-2014-02-001Moderate coverageService Binary Modifications

Adversaries may modify the binary file for an existing service to achieve Persistence while potentially evading defenses. If a newly created or modified runs as a service, it may indicate APT activity. However, services are frequently installed by legitimate software.

A well-tuned baseline is essential to differentiating between benign and malicious service modifications. ### Output Description The Service Name and approximate time in which changes occurred on each host.

pseudocode
legitimate_installers = ["C:\windows\system32\msiexec.exe", "C:\windows\syswow64\msiexec.exe", ...]

file_change = search File:Create,Modify
process = search Process:Create
service_process = filter processes where (parent_exe == "services.exe")
modified_service = join (search, filter) where (
 file_change.time < service_process.time and
 file_change.file_path == service_process.image_path
)

modified_service = filter modified_service where (modified_service.file_change.image_path not in legitimate_installers)
output modified_service
CAR-2014-03-005Moderate coverageRemotely Launched Executables via Services

There are several ways to cause code to execute on a remote host. One of the most common methods is via the Windows Service Control Manager (SCM), which allows authorized users to remotely create and modify services. Several tools, such as PsExec, use this functionality.

When a client remotely communicates with the Service Control Manager, there are two observable behaviors. First, the client connects to the [RPC Endpoint Mapper](../CAR-2014-05-001) over 135/tcp. This handles authentication, and tells the client what port the endpoint-in this case the SCM-is listening on.

Then, the client connects directly to the listening port on services.exe. If the request is to start an existing service with a known command line, the SCM process will run the corresponding command. This compound behavior can be detected by looking for services.exe receiving a network connection and immediately spawning a child process.

pseudocode
process = search Process:Create
flow = search Flow:Start
service = filter process where (parent_exe == "services.exe")
remote_start = join (flow, service ) where (
 flow.hostname == service.hostname and
 flow.pid == service.pid and
 (flow.time < service.time < flow.time + 1 second)
)
output remote_start
CAR-2014-05-002Moderate coverageServices launching Cmd

Windows runs the Service Control Manager (SCM) within the process services.exe. Windows launches services as independent processes or DLL loads within a svchost.exe group. To be a legitimate service, a process (or DLL) must have the appropriate service entry point SvcMain.

If an application does not have the entry point, then it will timeout (default is 30 seconds) and the process will be killed. To survive the timeout, adversaries and red teams can create services that direct to cmd.exe with the flag /c, followed by the desired command. The /c flag causes the command shell to run a command and immediately exit.

As a result, the desired program will remain running and it will report an error starting the service. This analytic will catch that command prompt instance that is used to launch the actual malicious executable. Additionally, the children and descendants of services.exe will run as a SYSTEM user by default.

Thus, services are a convenient way for an adversary to gain Persistence and Privilege Escalation.

pseudocode
process = search Process:Create
cmd = filter process where (exe == "cmd.exe" and parent_exe == "services.exe")
output cmd
Splunk
index=__your_sysmon_index__ EventCode=1 Image="C:\\Windows\\*\\cmd.exe" ParentImage="C:\\Windows\\*\\services.exe"
EQL
process where subtype.create and
  (process_name == "cmd.exe" and parent_process_name == "services.exe")
DNIF
_fetch * from event where $LogName=WINDOWS-SYSMON AND $EventID=1 AND $App=cmd.exe AND $ParentProcess=regex(.*services.exe.*)i limit 30
LogPoint
norm_id=WindowsSysmon event_id=1 image="C:\Windows\System32\cmd.exe" parent_image="C:\Windows\System32\services.exe"

Caldera Emulation

1
MITRE Caldera abilities that emulate this technique - each is an executable action for automated adversary emulation.
persistencewindowsReplace a service binary with alternate binary
$s = Get-Service -Name #{host.service.modifiable};
if ($s.status -ne 'Stopped') { Stop-Service $s };
$exe = (Get-ItemProperty -Path "HKLM:\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\#{host.service.modifiable}").ImagePath.split()[0];
$path = (Resolve-Path $exe).Path;
Copy-Item -Path $path -Destination ($path + ".saved");
Copy-Item -Path "C:\Windows\System32\snmptrap.exe" -Destination $path

Comply & Defend

Intelligence Graph · click any node to traverse
CVETechnique ActorTool Family
drag to reposition · click any node to traverse · button top-right enlarges
External lookups - second-class, for what we don’t hold ourselves
Vulnerabilities
CISA KEV catalog
CWE weaknesses
CAPEC attack patterns
Package vulnerabilities
Threat intelligence
Threat actors
Tools & malware
ATT&CK techniques
IOCs
Detection & defense
Sigma rules
YARA rules
Atomic Red Team tests
D3FEND countermeasures
Compliance
NIST 800-53
ISO 27001:2022
SOC 2 TSC
PCI-DSS v4.0
CIS Controls v8.1
About
All capabilities
Live statistics
Data sources
Privacy policy
Terms of service
threatengine.sh  ·  Open-source threat intelligence platform  ·  100+ authoritative sources  ·  Every fact traces to its origin