Skip to content

[New] Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host #5343

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[New] Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host #5343

wants to merge 9 commits into from
+206 −1

Conversation

@Samirbous
Copy link
Contributor

@Samirbous Samirbous commented Nov 19, 2025

Using ES|QL and alerts risk score to identify top risky hosts based on presence of multiple alert touching at least 4 unique tactics in a 24h time Window.

@Samirbous
[New] Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host
64dfae9 
Using ES|QL and alerts risk score to identify top risky hosts based on presence of multiple alert touching at least 4 unique tactics in a 24h time Window.
@Samirbous Samirbous self-assigned this Nov 19, 2025
@Samirbous Samirbous added Rule: New Proposal for new rule Domain: Endpoint labels Nov 19, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 19, 2025

Rule: New - Guidelines

These guidelines serve as a reminder set of considerations when proposing a new rule.

Documentation and Context

  • Detailed description of the rule.
  • List any new fields required in ECS/data sources.
  • Link related issues or PRs.
  • Include references.

Rule Metadata Checks

  • creation_date matches the date of creation PR initially merged.
  • min_stack_version should support the widest stack versions.
  • name and description should be descriptive and not include typos.
  • query should be inclusive, not overly exclusive, considering performance for diverse environments. Non ecs fields should be added to non-ecs-schema.json if not available in an integration.
  • min_stack_comments and min_stack_version should be included if the rule is only compatible starting from a specific stack version.
  • index pattern should be neither too specific nor too vague, ensuring it accurately matches the relevant data stream (e.g., use logs-endpoint.process-* for process data).
  • integration should align with the index. If the integration is newly introduced, ensure the manifest, schemas, and new_rule.yaml template are updated.
  • setup should include the necessary steps to configure the integration.
  • note should include any additional information (e.g. Triage and analysis investigation guides, timeline templates).
  • tags should be relevant to the threat and align/added to the EXPECTED_RULE_TAGS in the definitions.py file.
  • threat, techniques, and subtechniques should map to ATT&CK always if possible.

New BBR Rules

  • building_block_type should be included if the rule is a building block and the rule should be located in the rules_building_block folder.
  • bypass_bbr_timing should be included if adding custom lookback timing to the rule.

Testing and Validation

  • Provide evidence of testing and detecting the expected threat.
  • Check for existence of coverage to prevent duplication.

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta
  • ❌ Multiple Elastic Defend Alerts by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

@tradebot-elastic
Copy link

tradebot-elastic commented Nov 20, 2025 •
edited
Loading

⛔️ Test failed

Results
  • ❌ Alerts in Different ATT&CK Tactics by Host (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta
  • ❌ Multiple Elastic Defend Alerts by Agent (esql)
    • coverage_issue: no_rta
    • stack_validation_failed: no_rta

w0rk3r
w0rk3r reviewed Nov 23, 2025
View reviewed changes
rules/cross-platform/multiple_alerts_edr_elastic_defend_by_host.toml
Comment on lines +29 to +44
| stats Esql.alerts_count = COUNT(*),
Esql.event_code_distinct_count = count_distinct(event.code),
Esql.rule_name_distinct_count = COUNT_DISTINCT(rule.name),
Esql.file_hash_distinct_count = COUNT_DISTINCT(file.hash.sha256),
Esql.process_name_distinct_count = COUNT_DISTINCT(process.entity_id),
Esql.event_code_values = VALUES(event.code),
Esql.rule_name_values = VALUES(rule.name),
Esql.message_values = VALUES(message),
Esql.file_path_values = VALUES(file.path),
Esql.dll_path_values = VALUES(dll.path),
Esql.process_executable_values = VALUES(process.executable),
Esql.process_parent_executable_values = VALUES(process.parent.executable),
Esql.process_command_line_values = VALUES(process.command_line),
Esql.process_hash_sha256_values = VALUES(process.hash.sha256),
Esql.file_hash_sha256_values = VALUES(file.hash.sha256),
Esql.dll_hash_sha256_values = VALUES(dll.hash.sha256) by agent.id
Copy link
Contributor

@w0rk3r w0rk3r Nov 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we need to test whether this could cause performance problems, coz it looks expensive 👀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@w0rk3r w0rk3r w0rk3r left review comments

@terrancedejesus terrancedejesus Awaiting requested review from terrancedejesus

@Aegrah Aegrah Awaiting requested review from Aegrah

@Mikaayenson Mikaayenson Awaiting requested review from Mikaayenson

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@Samirbous Samirbous

Labels

backport: auto Domain: Endpoint Rule: New Proposal for new rule

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@Samirbous @tradebot-elastic @w0rk3r