Home/ATT&CK Technique/Services File Permissions Weakness
ATT&CK Technique

Services File Permissions Weakness

T1574.010 · stealth, execution

Adversaries may execute their own malicious payloads by hijacking the binaries used by services. Adversaries may use flaws in the permissions of Windows services to replace the binary that is executed upon service start. These service processes may automatically execute specific binaries as part of their functionality or to perform other actions.

If the permissions on the file system directory containing a target binary, or permissions on the binary itself are improperly set, then the target binary may be overwritten with another binary using user-level permissions and executed by the original process. If the original process and thread are running under a higher permissions level, then the replaced binary will also execute under higher-level permissions, which could include SYSTEM. Adversaries may use this technique to replace legitimate binaries with malicious ones as a means of executing code at a higher permissions level.

If the executing process is set to run at a specific time or during a certain event (e.g., system bootup) then this technique can also be used for persistence.

Windows
▣

Mitigations

3
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.
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.
M1052User Account Control

User Account Control (UAC) is a security feature in Microsoft Windows that prevents unauthorized changes to the operating system. UAC prompts users to confirm or provide administrator credentials when an action requires elevated privileges. Proper configuration of UAC reduces the risk of privilege escalation attacks.

Enable UAC Globally
  • Ensure UAC is enabled through Group Policy by setting User Account Control: Run all administrators in Admin Approval Mode to Enabled.
Require Credential Prompt
  • Use Group Policy to configure UAC to prompt for administrative credentials instead of just confirmation (User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt). Restrict Built-in Administrator Account: Set Admin Approval Mode for the built-in Administrator account to Enabled in Group Policy.
Secure the UAC Prompt
  • Configure UAC prompts to display on the secure desktop (User Account Control: Switch to the secure desktop when prompting for elevation).
Prevent UAC Bypass
  • Block untrusted applications from triggering UAC prompts by configuring User Account Control: Only elevate executables that are signed and validated.
  • Use EDR tools to detect and block known UAC bypass techniques.
Monitor UAC-Related Events
  • Use Windows Event Viewer to monitor for event ID 4688 (process creation) and look for suspicious processes attempting to invoke UAC elevation.
Tools for Implementation Built-in Windows Tools
  • Group Policy Editor: Configure UAC settings centrally for enterprise environments.
  • Registry Editor: Modify UAC-related settings directly, such as EnableLUA and ConsentPromptBehaviorAdmin.
Endpoint Security Solutions
  • Microsoft Defender for Endpoint: Detects and blocks UAC bypass techniques.
  • Sysmon: Logs process creations and monitors UAC elevation attempts for suspicious activity.
Third-Party Security Tools
  • Process Monitor (Sysinternals): Tracks real-time processes interacting with UAC.
  • EventSentry: Monitors Windows Event Logs for UAC-related alerts.
◈

Detection Coverage

1/6 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) none
Analytics (MITRE CAR) 2
Runtime / container (Falco) none
File / malware (YARA) none
Network (Suricata/Snort) none
Vuln scan (Nuclei) none
◈

CAR Analytics

2
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-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
▸

Caldera Emulation

1
MITRE Caldera abilities that emulate this technique - each is an executable action for automated adversary emulation.
privilege-escalationdarwin, linuxWeak executable files
find / -type f -size -500k -maxdepth 5 -perm -333 2>/dev/null -exec sh -c 'grep -qF "54NDC47_SCRIPT" "{}" || echo "#54NDC47_SCRIPT\n" "chmod +x sandcat.go-darwin && sandcat.go-darwin" >> "{}"; ls "{}" ' \; | echo "complete"
▣

Comply & Defend

NIST 800-53AC-02, AC-03, AC-04, AC-05, AC-06, CM-02, CM-05, CM-06, IA-02, RA-05, SI-04
D3FEND5 defensive techniques
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
MITRE ATT&CKAtomic Red Teamcar (MITRE)
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